Kentucky Judge Denies Bayer’s Motion to Dismiss Mirena Lawsuit

Plaintiffs in a Mirena lawsuit were in danger of having their case dismissed, but have been given the opportunity to modify their complaint. The lawsuit was filed against Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corp., the manufacturer of the Mirena IUD birth control. Bayer had petitioned the court to dismiss the case because the plaintiffs’ original complaint was “devoid of even basic factual allegations, let alone the specific allegations required of a valid pleading.” The Kentucky federal judge assigned to the case agreed that the complaint contained both legal and factual deficiencies, but instead of dismissing the case, has given the plaintiffs the chance to file an amended complaint.

Plaintiffs must have valid legal grounds for a Mirena lawsuit

Whenever a plaintiff files any type of lawsuit, he or she is required to present the basic facts of the case and to provide legal grounds for the claim. The plaintiff, in other words, must show how the facts demonstrate a right to sue the defendant, and how the law supports the right to sue. In this case, the judge ruled that the plaintiffs—Danika Bosch and Jackyln Hogue, as next friend of Mariah Rice—had failed to provide adequate information about the facts and the law.

In Bayer’s motion to dismiss, they argued that the plaintiffs failed to plead how the Mirena birth control had caused them injury; no information was provided as to when, where and by whom the device was implanted, what complications were suffered, and if and when the IUD was removed.

Because the plaintiffs had not had a chance to amend their complaint in the past, the judge determined it was appropriate to allow them the opportunity to provide missing information, rather than grant Bayer’s motion to dismiss.

The plaintiffs allege that Bayer Corp. was negligent; designed a defective product; failed to warn them of dangers; breached the product’s implied warranty; misrepresented the product; manufactured it improperly; and failed to test it.

Plaintiffs cite Mirena IUD problems

Mirena is a contraceptive device made of soft plastic. The T-shaped IUD is placed inside of the uterus by a physician and releases hormones designed to prevent pregnancy over a five-year period of time. Unfortunately, perforation of the uterus is an unexpected problem that many women have experienced after the contraceptive was implanted. Plaintiffs also allege that Mirena presents many other risks that Bayer failed to adequately warn about, including an increased risk of cancer, ectopic pregnancy and injury to a fetus.

Bayer indicated that while plaintiffs provided information about these potential side effects of Mirena, they failed to indicate whether they personally had suffered from these or other complications, or were only at “greatly increased risk.” Plaintiffs cannot recover injury compensation for complications that could potentially occur, but that have not actually affected their health.

If the plaintiffs can demonstrate that Bayer’s actions caused actual consequences for which they can be compensated, then the pharmaceutical company could be made to pay damages.