Top Rated Personal Injury and Mass Tort Attorneys:
Marin & Murphy Law Firm

On September 3, the FDA published a consumer-facing recall notice for an action it had already classified a month earlier: Boston Scientific Neuromodulation's removal of the Infinion™ CX spinal cord stimulator lead. Trade press picked it up the next day, most of it leading with a single number, 1,081 serious injuries, and going no further. The injury count is the least useful thing in the record. Two other fields do more work, and neither has been quoted anywhere I can find. What the recall record actually says The underlying entry is Recall Z-2879-2026, recall event 98974, classified Class I, the category reserved for defects that may cause serious injury or death. It covers all unused Infinion CX Lead Kits, models SC-2317-50 and SC-2317-70, 1,079 units in commerce. Domestic distribution is recorded as New York; the action also reaches eighteen other countries. Boston Scientific initiated it on June 17 and the FDA posted it on August 5, which means the classification had been sitting on the agency's site for four weeks before the consumer notice drew anyone's attention to it. The manufacturer's stated reason, verbatim from the recall record, is that the lead body "may be exposed to stress at the...

By Matthew T. Marin, Marin & Murphy Law Firm — with Morgan Green, Law Student Co-Author Permission to republish: this article may be reproduced in full, in any medium, provided authorship is attributed to the authors and Marin & Murphy Law Firm, all hyperlinks are preserved, and the original source is cited as this page. Summary of the Analysis General causation is not the contested ground in Olympus duodenoscope litigation. Specific causation is. This article proposes a two-axis screen — the interval-and-era screen — for evaluating these claims: the elapsed time between the ERCP and the documented infection, and the generation of the device and reprocessing regime in force when the procedure was performed. The second axis is the one most analyses omit, and the assumption buried in that omission is that the duodenoscope contamination problem was engineered out with the disposable-endcap redesign in 2020. The FDA record does not support that assumption. As of the most recent agency data, four FDA-classified corrective actions on Olympus duodenoscopes remain open, the most recent initiated October 14, 2025, on the redesigned model — with FDA recording the trigger as “continued reports of positive cultures and infections” and the cause as “device design.”...

During the legislative fight over Rhode Island’s revival-window law, the Diocese of Providence publicly argued that opening the Church to previously time-barred childhood sexual abuse lawsuits could force it into bankruptcy as similar laws have done to dioceses in other states. That is a stated position, not a filing. As of this writing, no bankruptcy has occurred. But for attorneys evaluating claims under the revival window, the possibility changes how the next two years should be planned. Here is what diocesan Chapter 11 has actually meant elsewhere, and how it would interact with Rhode Island’s deadlines. Key takeaways A diocesan Chapter 11 has generally not erased survivors’ claims. In the cases resolved to date, claims moved into a court-supervised process and were paid through a settlement trust funded by diocesan assets, affiliated entities, and insurance. The serious risk in other dioceses has been the bar date which is a single court-set deadline for filing a proof of claim. Survivors who missed it were generally barred from any recovery, including some who had previously sued, reported, or settled. Rhode Island claimants are currently on one clock; the June 30, 2028 filing deadline for qualifying revived claims. A Chapter 11 filing would...