The Claimants’ Advisory Committee (CAC) is the official committee appointed by the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Michigian to represent the interests of women in the Dow Corning Bankruptcy Settlement Plan. They have a website with information concerning the Settlement Facility for the Dow Corning Trust (SF-DCT).
Phone Number: 419-394-0717
Email address: email@example.com,
Mailing address: Claimants’ Advisory Committee, P.O. Box 665, St. Marys, OH 45885.
You can also sign up on the website to receive a free copy of their monthly electronic newsletter by e-mail.
LATEST COURT ORDERS ON THE WEBSITE
July 31, 2014 – 6th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that tissue expanders are included in the definition of “Breast Implants” June 20, 2014 – Stipulation and Order Recommending the Appointment of the Honorable Pamela R. Harwood as Lien Judge March 31, 2014 – 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Denying Dow Corning’s Motion to Stay Partial Premium Payments February 25, 2014 – Order Denying Motion to Stay Pending Appeal.
LINKS TO RELATED WEBSITES
Settlement Facility website: www.dcsettlement.com
Email address: firstname.lastname@example.org
Mailing address: Settlement Facility – DC Trust P.O. Box 52429 Houston, TX 77052-2429
Phone Number: (713) 874-6099
Toll free Phone Number: (866) 874-6099 (within the U.S.)
International Toll Free Number AT&T Direct Access Number: + 866 + 874 6099 (outside the U.S.)
MDL 926 Claims Office for the Revised Settlement Program:
Website: www.fjc.gov (MDL 926 Court)
Website: www.claimsoffice-926.com (MDL 926 Claims Office) The MDL 926 Claims Office website is still under development, so some “headings” do not have any information listed. Additional information will be posted as it becomes available.
Email address: email@example.com
Mailing address: MDL 926 Claims Office P.O. Box 56666 Houston, TX 77256
Phone Number: 1-800-600-0311
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Website address: www.mied.uscourts.gov
For a Dow Corning Breast Implant Lawyer contact the Dow Corning Breast Implant Helpline
Our lawyers are private practice lawyers. They are not employed by or affiliated with the Dow Corning Claims Settlement Office. If you hire one they are your advocates for you.
Breast Implant Lawyers Accepting Dow Corning Breast Implant ClaimsOur Breat Implant lawyers are reviewing Dow Corning Breast Implant Claims for women implanted with Dow Corning implants prior to June 1, 1993 and who are registered with the SF-DCT.
We are here to help with your Dow Corning silicone breast implant claims and will connect you with a female silicone breast Implant lawyer who has been helping women for 2 decades. Our lawyers have helped women obtain settlements for breast implant diseases such as Lupus, Scleroderma and General Connective Tissue Diseases.
DECEMBER 3, 2015
The District Court issued an Order approving the Consent Order To Establish Guidelines for Distributions From The Class 7 Silicone Material Claimants’ Fund. This means that the Court has authorized approved disease claims in Class 7 to be paid and has approved the parties’ agreed interpretation of “marshaling.” The order will become final once the 30-day time period for appeals has expired and no appeals have been filed. Payments can begin once the Order is final. This means that payments will not begin until sometime in January 2016 or thereafter.
DECEMBER 1, 2015
Copy of the SFDCT letter sent to claimaints with an approved Disease Option 2 claim regarding Increased Severity – Please note the deadline date of June 2, 2019 is incorrect. The correct deadline date is June 3, 2019. To read the response, click here.
SEPTEMBER 15, 2015
Omnibus Response to Objections & Submissions Responding to Consent Order to Establish Guidelines for Distribution From Class 7 Silicone Materials Claimants Fund. To read the response, click here.
JULY 29, 2015
Scheduling Order Regarding Consent Order to Establish Guidelines for Distributions from Class 7 Silicone Material Claimants’ Fund. To read the order, click here.
JULY 17, 2015ATTORNEYS:
Wells Fargo, the paying agent for the SF-DCT, requires law firms to provide an updated w-9 before payment can be issued. You can download a copy of the updated w-9 form here. Please complete and return the w-9 to the SF-DCT.
JUNE 12, 2015
Copy of the Notice to Class 7 Claimants Establishing Guidelines mailed by the SFDCT. To read the notice, click here.
JUNE 2, 2015
Judge Hood as issued an Order Authorizing Distribution of the Notice in reference to the Class 7 Consent Order. To read the order, click here.
MAY 26, 2015
CAC FILES MOTION ASKING FOR APPROVAL TO PAY CLASS 7 CLAIMS AND TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTE CONCERNING PREVIOUSLY DENIED “MARSHALING” CLAIMS
On Friday, May 22, 2015, the CAC filed a proposed Consent Order asking the Court to authorize payment of disease claims for Class 7 claimants. Most claimants in Class 7 have been previously paid a $600 Expedited Release Payment, a Foreign Gel Claimant Payment, or a $3,000 Cash-Out Offer. Claimants that rejected the Cash-Out Offer and elected for a full disease review have been waiting for payment on their approved disease claim. With the filing of the motion, the CAC hopes that these claimants can now be paid once the Consent Order is entered by the Court.
In addition, the CAC has reached an agreement with Dow Corning regarding thousands of Class 7 claims that were previously denied by the SF-DCT on the grounds that the claimant allegedly had not “marshaled” their recoveries from their primary manufacturer (Bristol, Baxter). Under this agreement, claims will be reviewed to determine if the claimant was eligible to apply for disease compensation from the Revised Settlement Program. If so, then that claimant cannot apply for the same disease in Class 7. However, if a claimant was not eligible to receive benefits for a particular disease in the RSP, then that claimant may seek compensation from Class 7.
For example, if a claimant was an Other Registrant in the RSP, the only disease option she was eligible for was Disease Option 2 (called Long Term Benefits). Other Registrants were not eligible for Disease Option 1 (Fixed Benefits) and diseases like ACTD. These claimants may now seek compensation for Disease Option 1 from Class 7.
The SF-DCT will re-review the claims that were previously denied and will send eligible claimants either a $600 Expedited Release Payment or $3,000 Cash-Out Payment. The Cash-Out Payment is available only to those claimants who submitted a disease claim in 2006. Claimants may reject the Cash-Out Payment and instead elect for a full disease review; however, if the claim is not approved, they will not be eligible for the Cash-Out Offer again.
MAY 4, 2015
The MDL Common Benefit Trust fund has announced that it will offer women who were not compensated for Explantation in either the MDL or Dow Corning Settlement a chance to apply for $5,000 explant payment. For more information about this program, please click here. Please note that this program is not affiliated with either the RSP or Dow Corning Settlement Plan.
If you are having difficulty getting your medical insurance to cover the cost of the explant surgery, there is a new resource for women. The Insurance Coverage Assistance Program will be available to provide advice and assistance on how to assess this Medicare, Medicaid, and health care coverage for issues related to breast implants. This program is to be operated by the National Center for Health Research, a consumer-oriented non-profit group in Washington, D.C., that has helped women seek insurance coverage for breast implant removal. The National Center currently operates the breastimplantinfo.org website. You may email them at firstname.lastname@example.org with your name and email address for more information, including their toll-free number. If you do not have access to email, you can call them at 202-223-4000.
FEBRUARY 10, 2015
On January 27, 2015, the Court of Appeals reversed the District Court’s authorization to make 50% partial Premium Payments. Fortunately, the SF-DCT has already made 98% of the partial Premium Payments to eligible, approved claimants. This money does not need to be repaid. Claimants can keep the partial Premium Payment checks that were issued to them. Unfortunately, the remaining 2% of claimants who did not receive their partial Premium Payment check (or returned it for reissuance, or who had lost checks) are on hold pending either a consensual resolution to pay their claims or a court order. A copy of the ruling is under the tab “Court Orders.”
February 10, 2015,
CAC filed a petition for rehearing on this ruling, asking the Court of Appeals to reconsider or rehear the issue based on what the CAC believes are two serious legal errors. A copy of the petition is under the tab “Appeals to the 6th Circuit” and then under the sub-tab “Premium Payments.”
IF YOU NEED HELP WITH YOUR DOW CORNING BREAST IMPLANT CLAIM CONTACT US TODAY
News Regarding the Dow Corning Expedited Release Checks
The Settlement Facility Dow Corning Trust has recently decided to send Expedited Release Payments in the amount of $2,000 to all Dow claimants whose cases are idle.
Important Information Regarding Accepting This Offer
Be aware that if you accept this payment you can NEVER apply for a disease claim in the future, even if you become sick.
What Should I Do Id I Receive An Expedited Release Check?
If you receive an expedited release check in the mail, you should not cash it. Call us to speaker to a Dow Corningg Breast Implant lawyer to make sure you are doing the right thing.
Dow Corning Settlement Alert
If you cash the expedited release check you will be agreeing to settle your claim and can never get any additional funds.
Get A Boston Vaginal Mesh Lawyer
The vaginal mesh, pelvic mesh repair, lawsuits will be the largest mass tort harming women we have ever seen. It will way surpass the Dow Corning Breast Implant Class Action. In view of this we have expanded our vaginal mesh lawsuit department to help Boston women injured by a transvaginal mesh and have recruited the best
Boston Vaginal Mesh Lawyers
Boston Transvaginal Mesh Lawyers
Boston Bladder sling Attorneys
To service our callers who are suffering from their surgical mesh implants
The FDA Issued Warnings About Complications From Y Your Boston Transvaginal Mesh and TVT/TOT OB Tape Mesh Slings, Bladder slings
Boston women who have been surgically implanted with Transvaginal Mesh and Bladder sling, TVT/TOT tape implants for Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) and Sress Urinary Incontinence (SUI) are filing surgical pelvic mesh repair lawsuits.
Boston Vaginal Mesh implants Have Caused Far Worse Complications Than What They Were Meant to Cure.
Our Vaginal mesh lawsuit department wants to hear from you if you have experienced complications after your Transvaginal Mesh implant or Bladder Sling TOT/TVT implant. We are filing lawsuits for injured women
Boston statute of Limitations for filing a vaginal mesh lawsuit is still good. Do not wait.
With statistics suggesting that one in two women will experience pelvic organ prolapse during their lifetime it is not shocking that over 300,000 women have Prolene mesh implants for either uterine, bladder or bowel prolapse.
Prolapse can be from childbirth, obesity, and pelvic organ tumors. Since its introduction into the market in the 1990s, the vaginal mesh surgical implant has been used forpelvic organ prolapse. However these implants have been failing and transvaginal mesh attorneys have been filing pelvic mesh repair lawsuits. Severe complications have been reported by women who have been implanted with this device.
The FDA released negative information about the risks associated with the vaginal mesh in 2008. A warning issued in 2011 brought on a huge influx of lawsuits. There were enough lawsuits to form a consolidated multi district litigation to manage this huge influx of cases.
Pelvic Repair Mesh Multi District Lawsuits Have Been Consolidated Under Judge Goodwin in West Virginia
TransVaginal mesh lawsuit MDL – 2325, IN RE: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation
Pelvic mesh repair mesh lawsuit MDL – 2326 IN RE: Boston Scientific Corp. Pelvic Repair Syst
em Products Liability Litigation
Pelvic mesh repair mesh lawsuit MDL – 2327 IN RE: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation
Pelvic mesh repair mesh lawsuit MDL – 2387 IN RE: Coloplast Corp. Pelvic Support Systems Products Liability Litigation
Pelvic mesh lawsuit Cook Medical Surgical will be the fifth MDL
The Breast Implant Helpline has expanded it’s Vaginal Mesh and Bladder Sling Lawsuit Department to handle the huge number of calls we have begun getting since the opening of this new department. it is shocking as to how many women suffering from Dow Corning Breast implant complications have sisters or friends with vaginal mesh implant or bladder sling implant complications.
Our Transvaginal mesh lawyers are currently accepting both vaginal mesh and bladder sling lawsuits from women who have had the mesh surgically implanted in 3, 4 , 5 and 6 year product liability statute of limitation states including: Arkansas, D.C, Florida, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, N.Y, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming for an Ethicon, Boston Scientific, AMS, or C.R Bard Prolene mesh product used for organ prolapse or urinary incontinence.
If Your Vaginal Mesh Or Bladder Sling Was Implanted In One Of These States And Meets Other Criteria You Would Be Eligible
To find out if you qualify call us today.
Breast Implant Helpline keeps you up to date on all the latest medical breakthoughs
Arimidex Prevents First Breast Cancers
Published: Dec 12, 2013 | Updated: Dec 12, 2013
By Crystal Phend, Senior Staff Writer, MedPage Today
Reviewed by Zalman S. Agus, MD; Emeritus Professor, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania
Anastrozole, an aromatase inhibitor, reduces the incidence of breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women.
Side effects associated with estrogen deprivation, were only slightly more frequent in the anastrozole group than in the placebo group.
SAN ANTONIO — Anastrozole (Arimidex) reduced the risk of breast cancer by 53% in high-risk postmenopausal women, a primary prevention trial showed.
The aromatase inhibitor cut the incidence to 2% over 5 years compared with 4% on placebo (P<0.0001), Jack Cuzick, PhD, of Queen Mary University of London, and colleagues found in the IBIS-II trial.
The number needed to treat was 36 to prevent one breast cancer in 7 years of follow-up, the researchers pointed out here at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium and simultaneously online in The Lancet.
That primary prevention effect was larger than reported with tamoxifen or raloxifene (Evista) and similar to what was seen with fellow aromatase inhibitor exemestane (Aromasin) in the MAP.3 trial.
“This finding, along with the fact that most of the side-effects associated with estrogen deprivation were not attributable to treatment, provides support for the use of anastrozole in postmenopausal women at high risk of breast cancer,” Cuzick’s group argued.
The findings likely will put anastrozole in line to be added to breast cancer prevention guidelines, like exemestane was earlier this year, commented Matthew Goetz, MD, a medical oncologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn.
“I think the guidelines will probably be updated to reflect the fact that we now have level 1 evidence that both a steroidal (exemestane) and a nonsteroidal [anastrozole] aromatase inhibitor are effective in the primary prevention setting,” he told MedPage Today, calling the results reassuring.
However, David A. Cameron, MD, MSc, of Scotland’s Edinburgh Cancer Centre, wasn’t so convinced.
The key question is whether any primary prevention drugs actually prevent breast cancer deaths and improve overall survival for the price in toxicity, which no trial has yet shown, he argued in a commentary accompanying the Lancet paper.
Instead of true prevention of clinically significant, life-threatening breast cancers, “the consistent finding of an increased effect of prevention therapy on hormone-receptor-positive tumors supports the prediction made by modelling data that pharmacological prevention of breast cancer is actually early treatment of extant subclinical tumors,” he wrote.
“With two-thirds of the anastrozole benefit in screen-detected cancers, in view of their better outcomes, the likelihood of an eventual breast cancer mortality benefit seems small.”
Goetz disagreed, though, pointing to the fact that anastrozole halved the risk of invasive cancers in the trial (rate 2% versus 3%, HR 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.32-76).
The impact was driven by a 58% reduction in risk of invasive estrogen receptor (ER)-positive cancer, whereas no significant benefit accrued for invasive ER-negative tumors.
“It’s premature to say the trial is not a success,” he told MedPage Today. “This drug is reducing incidence of ER-positive breast cancer and for those often times the mortality effect is not seen for many years. Often recurrence is occurring in the second decade after being diagnosed.”
The International Breast cancer Intervention Study II (IBIS-II) included 3,864 postmenopausal women at high risk of breast cancer, defined by family history or prior diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ, lobular carcinoma in situ, or atypical ductal hyperplasia.
They were randomized to take 1 mg anastrozole or placebo daily for 5 years.
The trial had a pragmatic design, with imaging and other follow-up at the end of the 5 years based on local practice without central review. Women had a mammogram and breast exam at baseline (unless recently done) and every 2 years thereafter during the study.
At the median 5 years of follow-up, 40 anastrozole-treated women compared with 85 on placebo had developed any breast cancer, for a hazard ratio of 0.47 (95% CI 0.32-0.68).
The cumulative incidence was predicted to rise to 2.8% and 5.6%, respectively, after 7 years.
The advantage of the aromatase inhibitor also was greater in preventing high-grade cancers, with no impact on intermediate- or low-grade tumors.
“Although highly significant, this finding could have been a result of chance, because other indicators of aggressive or fast growing tumours (eg, node positivity and large tumour size) were not differentially affected,” the researchers warned.
Overall mortality was similar between groups (18 deaths with anastrozole versus 17 with placebo).
No specific causes of death were more common in one group than the other (P=0.836), but there were fewer cancers outside the breast, which the researchers called “surprising, especially for colorectal cancers, in which hormone replacement therapy is known to be protective and for which the ATAC trial suggested a non-significant increase with anastrozole compared with tamoxifen in the adjuvant setting.”
Despite guideline support, uptake of primary prevention has been low among eligible women. And that’s not likely to change with more of the same kind of efficacy data, Goetz suggested.
Side effects and cost are more likely to be deciding factors in the absence of any evidence that it will save women’s lives, Cameron explained.
He was critical of the toxicity profile, noting that about half or more of the women in both groups in the trial had musculoskeletal and vasomotor symptoms, while about a fifth had gynecologic adverse events.
“Although the increase in frequency with anastrozole [versus placebo] was modest for musculoskeletal (6%) and vasomotor (8%) events, more than 100 to 200 additional women had these symptoms in the anastrozole group compared with the placebo group — quite often to a moderate or severe level — to prevent 15 symptomatically diagnosed breast cancers,” Cameron argued.
The researchers took a different view of the same finding.
“Although many side-effects recorded have been associated with estrogen deprivation, they were only slightly more frequent in the anastrozole group than in the placebo group, indicating that most of these symptoms are not drug related,” they wrote, suggesting that disseminating that fact could help curb dropouts.
The study was funded by Cancer Research UK, the National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Sanofi-Aventis, and AstraZeneca.
Cuzick reported having received funding for IBIS-II from Sanofi-Aventis and AstraZeneca, and being a paid member of a speaker’s bureau for AstraZeneca.
Cameron and Goetz reported having no conflicts of interest to disclose.
The Vaginal Mesh, Bladder Sling Lawsuits
Pelvic mesh lawsuits have become the next big massive run of lawsuits for women injured by these devices. This looks like it will surpass the Dow Corning Breast Implant Class Action
What Is The Vaginal Mesh Or Bladder Sling?
Prolene mesh is a medical implant used to reinforce weakened or damaged pelvic muscle. The result of a weakened pelvic floor is organ prolapse or urinary incontinence . These mesh implants involved in the lawsuits are made from a synthetic material.
The Lawsuits Start With A Warning From The FDA
On July 13th, the FDA issued an Alert stating that serious complications associated with vaginal mesh/bladder slings for transvaginal mesh implants are not uncommon. This is the date when for the time clock statute of limitations for your state starts ticking.
What are the Vaginal Mesh or Bladder Sling Side Effects The Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits Allege?
The Florida Fort Lauderdale, Miami, West Palm Beach, Orlando, Tampa, Ft Myers, Jacksonville transvaginal mesh side lawsuits allege that women victims are experiencing injuries that could have been avoided had these women been given the proper information and the devices had the right pre market testing.
Florida Women Are Angry And The Want To Sue The Mesh Manufacturers
Fort Lauderdale, Miami, West palm Beach, Orlando, Tampa, Ft Myers, FL Mesh Sling Helpline is hearing from women wanting to get the lawsuit information and file a Pelvic Mesh lawsuit against Bard, Boston Scientific, Johnson and Johnson, AMS and Coloplast who are the mesh manufacturers. Infections, more incontinence, extreme pain during intercourse, UTI, back pain, inability to walk, and severe relentless pain are rampant in mesh implant victims.Some of these infections spread through the whole body and lead to death. Sometimes the vaginal mesh side effects can up to 7 years to develop after the initial surgery.
The Lawsuit Answers These Demands
The Fort Lauderdale West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Jacksonville, Tampa, Sarasota , FL Mesh Lawsuit a continues to claim hat there are other safer alternatives to synthetic mesh (biological mesh for example) that should be considered before the decision is made to use synthetic materials.
Florida Mesh Lawsuits Consolidated
Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Miami, Orlando Tampa FL Pelvic Mesh Lawsuits Have Been Consolidated in an MDL litogastion in West Virginia.
Vaginal Mesh Multi District Lawsuits Have Been Consolidated Under Judge Goodwin in West Virginia
Vaginal mesh lawsuit MDL – 2325, IN RE: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation
Vaginal mesh lawsuit MDL – 2326 IN RE: Boston Scientific Corp. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation
Vaginal mesh lawsuit MDL – 2327 IN RE: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation
Vaginal mesh lawsuit MDL – 2387 IN RE: Coloplast Corp. Pelvic Support Systems Products Liability Litigation
Vaginal mesh lawsuit Cook Medical Surgical will be the fifth MDL
Call our new Transvaginal mesh Lawsuit Lawyers help Department and file your pelvic mesh lawsuit today
Breast Implant Helpline keeps you updated on all breast implant news. Years after the Dow Corning Silicone Breast Implant disaster a new silicone breast implant hits the market. The FDA has approved a new silicone gel breast implant from Johnson & Johnson.
Next Generation breast Implant?
The Food and Drug Administration said it has approved a next-generation silicone breast implant from Mentor, a unit of New Brunswick-based Johnson & Johnson. Ladies let’s remember who this is. The same folks that bring you the vaginal mesh implant that is ruing lives nationwide. We watch with skepticism. The company’s MemoryShape breast implant uses a cross-linking gel design that the FDA says is firmer than previous implants. FDA regulators approved the new implant for breast enhancement and reconstruction in women at least 22 years old.
Can Silicone Breast Implants Make A Comeback?
Silicone gel implants have made a comeback recently after safety concerns kept them off the market for nearly 25 years.
The FDA banned sales of silicone breast implants in 1992, saying manufacturers had not provided enough medical data showing their safety and effectiveness. At the time, there were worries about a connection to a variety of diseases, including cancer and lupus. Alarming cases of ruptures added to the concern. Women are still waiting on settlements from the Dow Corning Class Actions and a new breast implant explant program has been announced.
The FDA said Friday it approved Mentor’s new implant based on studies tracking six years of data in 955 women. The agency said complications with Mentor’s MemoryShape implants were similar to those from previously approved silicone gel implants.
FDA is requiring Mentor to meet a number of requirements in connection with the new approval, including:
• Tracking the 955 women with the new implant
• Conducting a new study of 2,500 women who receive the new implant
• Evaluating women’s comprehension and perception of the implant’s labeling
• Analyzing any implants that are removed from women and returned to the manufacturer
More than one in five women who get implants for breast enhancement will need to have them replaced within five years, accord to an FDA analysis of company data released in 2011. Despite that relatively high failure rate, FDA regulators concluded that the silicone-gel implants are basically safe, as long as women understand they come with complications. Some critics of the implants say the failure rate may be even higher, since many women have dropped out of the company studies.
We will be watching.
You may have received a letter from the Dow Corning Trust explaining a Breast Implant explant program. For help in understanding your rights and to speak to a breast implant explant lawyer contact the Breast Implant Helpline today
There is a Breast Implant Explant Program Deadline
The final deadline to submit an Explant Claim to the SF-DCT is June 2, 2014. You must have acceptable Proof of Manufacturer before you can be considered for the Explant benefit. The Explant benefit is $5,000.00. To qualify for this benefit, you must have your Dow Corning implants removed and not replaced with silicone.
It can take six months or longer to schedule an explant surgery and to obtain the necessary medical records from your surgeon or hospital. If you are eligible to apply for this benefit, you should keep this deadline date in mind. Do not wait to discuss your explant surgery with your doctor. This should be done as soon as possible.
What Is Breast Implant Explant Surgery?
Breast explant surgery is mplant removal. Explant surgery is the process by which your breast implants are removed from the breasts. Depending upon the reason for the surgery, additional material may be removed.
Dow Corning Explant Benefits Notice
EXPLANT DEADLINE IS JUNE 2, 2014
The Settlement Facility will mail letters to Class 5 and 6 claimants on April 26, 2013 reminding them of the Explant Deadline of June 2, 2014.
What is the Explant Deadline? To be eligible for the $5,000 Explant benefit (Class 5 only), you must have your Dow Corning breast implant removed by June 2, 2014 and you cannot receive another silicone gel breast implant after that. To file a claim, you must submit the Explant Form and the operative statement from the Explant surgery. Only claimants in Class 5 and 6.1 (non-U.S. Dow Corning breast implant claimants) are eligible for the Explant Payment.
June 2, 2014 may seem like a long time away, but our experience has been that it often takes up to 6 months or more to schedule an appointment with your surgeon, schedule the surgery, and obtain the necessary medical reports (such as the Operative Report) to submit a claim by the deadline.
If your Dow Corning breast implant is not removed by June 2, 2014, then you cannot apply for the Explant benefit.There is still money available to help you remove your defective Dow implants. There is money available to help you remove your defective breast implants
The http://Yazbirthcontrolpillshelpline.com has lauched a Mirena IUD Helpline and a new Mirena IUD division for women experiencing complications from the Mirena IUD. “Women are the target for many dangerous drugs and medical devices” says, Lisa Spitzer MSW who supervises the new Mirena IUD division. “Birth control is a money maker and women are the targets”. “The women we speak to have had serious complications from the Mirena IUD. The device has gravitated out of position and severed the uterus.”.
Birth control has become the focus for lawsuits. Yaz and Yasmin, are in the news right now with lawyer ads. Is the Mirena next ? These birth control medications and devices are causing injuries to women in NYC, Florida, Texas, California, and all over the U.S.A.
The latest dangerous birth control device is the Mirena Silicone IUD. The Mirena IUD is manufactured by Bayer,which manufacturers Yaz, interestingly enough. It is a flexible intrauterine device that is placed into the uterus through the vagina by a GYN. Mirena releases a continuous dose of hormones (levonorgestrel) to prevent pregnancy for up to five years
Our women callers report the device has moved out of each original position and punctured the uterus or become firmly embedded in the uterus. Many state the doctors cannot find it . The Miriena has caused bleeding and other very serious complications. The new Mirena IUD Helpline is helping women with these complications. “Many women are telling us the doctors are refusing to remove the Mirena and many must have it surgically removed”. The http://yazbirthcontrolpillshelpline.com will continue to expand services to women as a resource for new news about dangerous birth control devices harming women. They are also working in conjunction with the well known http://vaginalmeshhelpline.com to get the message out there. The vaginal mesh is another dangerous device effecting over 300,000 women.
For a Mirena IUD Lawyer, vaginal Mesh Lawyer or lawyer for all drugs and devices harming women call us today www.classactionlawyernetwork.com
GranuFlo, Stryker Hip Replacement, Actos, Vaginal Mesh. The be