REVIA v. MENTOR CORPORATION et al
ORDER granting 33 Motion for Summary Judgment. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE CLAY D LAND on 09/02/2016. (CCL)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
IN RE MENTOR CORP. OBTAPE
TRANSOBTURATOR SLING PRODUCTS
MDL Docket No. 2004
O R D E R
Worldwide LLC’s suburethral sling product, ObTape Transobturator
Revia also asserts that she suffered injuries because
Mentor did not adequately warn her physicians about the risks
associated with ObTape.
Mentor seeks summary judgment because
Revia did not disclose a specific causation expert to opine that
Revia’s injuries were caused by defects in ObTape or a failure
See Lewis Decl. ¶ 6, ECF No. 33-3 in 4:13-cv-395
(“Plaintiff has never identified any purported expert witness to
Once Mentor showed that Revia could not produce admissible
evidence to establish specific causation, Revia had the burden
to point to some evidence to create a genuine fact dispute on
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(1) (“A party
asserting that a fact . . . is genuinely disputed must support
the assertion by citing to particular parts of materials in the
Revia did not respond to Mentor’s summary judgment
Thus, she did not point to any evidence to establish
See, e.g., Starr v. A.J. Struss & Co., No. 01-14-
00702-CV, 2015 WL 4139028, at *6 (Tex. App. July 9, 2015) (“To
establish causation in a personal injury case, a plaintiff must
prove that the conduct of the defendant caused an event and that
this event caused the plaintiff to suffer compensable injuries.”
(quoting Burroughs Wellcome Co. v. Crye, 907 S.W.2d 497, 499
Mentor’s summary judgment motion (ECF No. 33 in
4:13-cv-395) is therefore granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 2nd day of September, 2016.
s/Clay D. Land
CLAY D. LAND
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Revia is a Texas resident whose ObTape-related treatment occurred in
Texas, and she filed her complaint in this Court. Texas law therefore
applies to Revia’s claims.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?