Blanco

Blanco v. Baxter Healthcare Corp.

Good Law
158 Cal. App. 4th 1039·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 34·70 Cal. Rptr. 3d 566·64 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 790
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 11, 2008G038255California8,025 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Leary, J.

Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment after the trial court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment in a wrongful death action concerning a bileaflet mitral heart valve. The court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the ground the Medical Device Amendments (MDA), title 21 United States Code section 360k(a) (section 360k(a)), preempted plaintiffs’ state common law causes of action. Plaintiffs argue the court erroneously concluded section 360k(a) preempted the state common law causes of action because a state law remedy for a manufacturing defect does not impose a state requirement “different from, or in addition to” a federal requirement relating to a device’s safety or effectiveness. We disagree and affirm the judgment.

FACTS

In 1982, 18-year-old Claudia Blanco (Claudia) was diagnosed with mitral valve stenosis—narrowing/blocking of the heart’s mitral valve that prevents the valve from properly opening and, therefore, obstructs blood flow between the left chambers of the heart. Around the same time, Hemex Scientific, Inc. (Hemex), developed prototypes for new mechanical mitral and aortic heart valves. Hemex subsequently applied for an investigational…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.