Johnson v. C R Bard Incorporated et al

Filing 271

ORDER on Deposition Designations as to Jason Greer. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 6/5/2021. (nks)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
NATALIE JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.
19-cv-760-wmc
C.R. BARD INC. and
BARD PERIPHERAL VASCULAR INC.,
Defendants.

Before the court is the parties’ request for ruling on objections to certain deposition
designations as to Jason Greer.
DEPONENT
Greer, Jason
08/11/2014

PL AFFIRM

DEF OBJECTIONS

PL RESPONSE TO
OBJECTIONS

COURT
RULING

Bard objects to the
playing of this deposition
under Rules 401, 402
and 403. Mr. Greer is a
former sales manager who
left Bard in 2007, before
the development of the
Meridian filter. In fact,
he had no involvement
with the Meridian filter
in any capacity.
Bard objects to Plaintiff’s
references to “Admitted
in the Peterson case” as a
basis for allowing a
designation to played, or
overruling an objection,
and submits that the
testimony should be
consider based on the
facts and applicable law

Bard chose to market the
Meridian filter using the
510(k) process which
relied upon the Recovery
filter as the predicate. All
G2 filter platform filters,
including the Meridian
trace their design history
to the Recovery filter and
the defects in the
Meridian design only can
be understood only in the
context of the entire filterline development.
Testimony regarding the
Recovery, G2 and Eclipse
filters' complications,
testing, warnings and
design are relevant and are
not unfairly prejudicial.
Judge Campbell agreed

OVERRULED

1

and rulings in this case.
The Peterson case
involved a different filter,
different claims, and was
decided under different
state law.

with this position in Jones
v. Bard. [MDL Order No.
10819]. The failure modes
are relevant to the
assessment of the defects
in the design of the filter
whether a particular
failure mode has occurred;
however, Mrs. John has
experienced tilt,
migration, perforation,
and fracture of her filter
with pieces of the device
embolizing to her heart.
She is still at risk for
death or serious injury in
the future.

Greer, Jason
08/11/2014

5:16-5:18

Admitted in Peterson

Greer, Jason
08/11/2014

5:21-5:22

Admitted in Peterson

Greer, Jason
08/11/2014

22:06-22:11

Admitted in Peterson

Greer, Jason
08/11/2014

27:05-27:10

Admitted in Peterson

Greer, Jason
08/11/2014

173:07
ending with
"No. 12."

Rules 401, 402, 403 –
Testimony relates to
irrelevant and prejudicial
evidence regarding Bard’s
conduct related to the
Recovery Filter.
Irrelevant and any
probative value
outweighed by prejudicial
effect.

2

Admitted in Peterson
Bard's knowledge
regarding the Recovery
Filter's risks, and Bard's
intent in ultimately
redesigning its retrievable
filters to create the G2
family (including the filter
at issue) in response to
the risks of the Recovery
Filter, is relevant to,
among other things, Bard's
warnings were adequate
and its knowlegde based
upn the failure of its
testing and design of the
G2X and Meridian.
Further, issues with the

OVERRULED

Recovery Filter are
relevant to consumer
expectations in
connection with the filter.

Greer, Jason
08/11/2014

174:16175:09

Rules 401, 402, 403 –
Testimony relates to
irrelevant and prejudicial
evidence regarding Bard’s
conduct related to the
Recovery Filter.
Irrelevant and any
probative value
outweighed by prejudicial
effect.

Admitted in Peterson
Bard's knowledge
regarding the Recovery
Filter's risks, and Bard's
intent in ultimately
redesigning its retrievable
filters to create the G2
family (including the filter
at issue) in response to
the risks of the Recovery
Filter, is relevant to,
among other things, Bard's
warnings were adequate
and its knowlegde based
upn the failure of its
testing and design of the
G2X and Meridian.
Further, issues with the
Recovery Filter are
relevant to consumer
expectations in
connection with the filter.

OVERRULED

DEPONENT

DEF
COUNTER

PL OBJECTIONS

DEF RESPONSE TO
OBJECTIONS

COURT
RULING

Greer, Jason
08/11/2014

174:10175:11
subject to
objection

Greer, Jason
08/11/2014

175:13175:20
subject to
objection

3

Greer, Jason
08/11/2014

175:22176:05
subject to
objection

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ request for rulings on objections to certain
designations is GRANTED, and the objections are sustained in part and overruled in part as
provided above.
Entered this 5th day of June, 2021.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
__________________________________
WILLIAM M. CONLEY
District Judge

4