Tag Archives: Filed

Fresenius NaturaLyte, GranuFlo Dialysis Heart Attack Lawsuit Allegations Update: FDA Cites Dialysis Center over Deficiencies as Much more Situations Filed

Posted on by

San Diego, CA (PRWEB) June 27, 2013

http://www.resource4thepeople.com/defectivemedicaldevices/Dialysis-Lawsuit.html

&#13

Resource4thePeople reports nowadays on its most current update to shoppers who are following the litigation involving allegations that Fresenius NaturaLyte and GranuFlo kidney dialysis products brought on life-threatening troubles for individuals.

&#13

The most current news is that as a federal judge moves forward on consolidated federal lawsuits* involving these allegations a search of U.S. Food and Drug Administration records shows that Fresenius was cited** by federal regulators more than deficiencies uncovered at 1 of the companys facilities.

&#13

In a warning letter dated March 13, 2013, FDA officials informed Fresenius Health-related Care officials that dialyzers manufactured at the companys Ogden, Utah plant are not in conformity with existing federal good manufacturing requirements.

&#13

The FDAs warning letter additional calls into query the good quality of goods that Fresenius is producing for kidney individuals and comes at a time when the federal court method has consolidated situations from across the nation containing allegations that GranuFlo and NaturaLyte allegedly have life-threatening side effects, stated Resource4thePeople.

&#13

We will continue to supply updates for shoppers who may possibly have been impacted by these dialysis goods and will report on the progress of the federal consolidated litigation. We also will continue to offer buyers free consultations about legal rights to which they may be entitled to seek compensation.

&#13

At least 161 federal NaturaLyte and GranuFlo lawsuits alleging severe heart difficulties and deaths from the use of these merchandise have been consolidated ahead of U.S. District Court Judge Douglas P. Woodlock, according to the court docket.*

&#13

The court filings also summarize the particular allegations involved that plaintiffs who used NaturaLyte and GranuFlo claim they must be compensated for:

&#13

These actions share factual troubles arising from allegations that Plaintiffs suffered injury or death brought on by the use of GranuFlo and/or NaturaLyte products in the course of hemodialysis, which allegedly might cause metabolic alkalosis in sufferers resulting in low blood stress, hypokalemia, hypoxemia, hypercapnia, cardiac arrhythmia, or cardiopulmonary arrest.

&#13

All the actions involve factual concerns relating to whether or not GranuFlo and NaturaLyte were defectively developed or manufactured, no matter whether Fresenius, the manufacturer of these dialysate goods, knew or ought to have known of the alleged propensity of these merchandise to result in injury and whether or not it supplied adequate directions and warnings with these goods.

&#13

Resource4thePeople, in response to inquiries from consumers, is informing them that even although this multidistrict litigation has been produced new inquiries will nevertheless be accepted and further circumstances will continue to be filed.

&#13

Amongst numerous new situations that have been not too long ago filed are those by:&#13

&#13

Transvaginal Mesh Merchandise Brought on Extreme Injuries in Texas Lady, Alleges Lawsuit Filed by Parker Waichman LLP

Posted on by


New York, New York (PRWEB) July 01, 2013

Parker Waichman LLP, a national law firm devoted to safeguarding the rights of victims injured by dangerous drugs and medical devices, has filed a lawsuit on behalf of a Texas woman who alleges that she was injured by transvaginal mesh items. The suit was filed on June ten, 2013, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia (Case No. 2:13-cv-11164) in the multidistrict litigation (MDL) entitled In Re: Coloplast Corp., Pelvic Support System Merchandise Liability Litigation (MDL No. 2387). Mentor Worldwide LLC, Coloplast Corp., Ethicon, Inc., Ethicon, LLC, Johnson &amp Johnson and C.R. Bard, Inc. have been named as Defendants.

&#13

According to the Complaint, the Plaintiff was implanted with the Novasilk-Synthetic Flat Mesh in May 2011, the Alyte Y-Mesh in October 2012 and the TVT Exact in October 2012. These devices have been implanted to treat the Plaintiffs pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The lawsuit alleges that these devices are defective and brought on critical and possibly permanent injuries. Moreover, the Defendants allegedly knew about these defects but did not warn consumers in order to protect their own financial interests. The Plaintiff is suing for discomfort and suffering, emotional distress, and economic loss, and is seeking compensation for punitive damages.

&#13

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports that the most typical complications connected with transvaginal mesh may possibly include:

Diabetes Drug Actos Caused Bladder Cancer and Wrongful Death of Oklahoma Man, Alleges Lawsuit Filed by Parker Waichman LLP

Posted on by


New York, New York (PRWEB) June 25, 2013

Parker Waichman LLP, a national law firm dedicated to protecting the rights of victims injured by defective drugs, has filed a lawsuit on behalf of an Oklahoma man who developed bladder cancer and subsequently died, allegedly after taking the diabetes drug Actos (pioglitazone). The suit was filed on Might 23, 2013, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (Case No. 6:13-cv-1237). It is one of thousands of circumstances that have been filed as component of the multidistrict litigation (MDL) entitled In Re: Actos (pioglitazone) Products Liability Litigation (six:11-md-2299). Takeda Pharmaceuticals, America Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. f/k/a Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc. Takeda Pharmaceutical Firm Limited and Eli Lilly and Company have been named as Defendants. Jerrold S. Parker, founding partner of Parker Waichman LLP, serves on the Plaintiffs Steering Committee in the litigation.

&#13

According to the Complaint, the Plaintiff began taking Actos to treat his Variety 2 diabetes in November 2008. In January 2010, he was diagnosed with bladder cancer. He died in October 2012, allegedly due to the fact of Actos side effects. The lawsuit filed on his behalf alleges that the Defendants knew about the threat of bladder cancer but did not disclose this details to customers in order to protect economic interests. The Plaintiff alleges that Actos triggered pain and suffering, emotional distress and substantially decreased the Plaintiffs capability to take pleasure in life. The suit is also seeking damages for loss of consortium on behalf of the Plaintiffs spouse.

&#13

On June 15, 2011, the U.S. Meals and Drug Administration (FDA) warned that taking Actos for far more than a year could considerably increase the risk of bladder cancer. The safety label on Actos was updated to address this threat.

&#13

Some analysis research assistance the notion of a hyperlink amongst Actos and bladder cancer. The British Medical Journal published a study on Might 31, 2012, that revealed Actos customers were twice as probably to create bladder cancer right after two years. Then, on July three, 2012, the Canadian Health-related Association Journal reported that sufferers taking the medication have been 22 % much more likely to get bladder cancer.

&#13

Parker Waichman LLP continues to offer cost-free legal consultations to victims of Actos injuries, including bladder cancer, heart problems, and eye injuries. If you or a loved a single have been diagnosed with bladder cancer after taking Actos, please contact their workplace by going to yourlawyer.com. Free of charge case evaluations are also accessible by calling 1-800-LAW-Info (1-800-529-4636).

&#13

Get in touch with: &#13

Parker Waichman LLP &#13

Gary Falkowitz, Managing Lawyer &#13

(800) LAW-Info &#13

(800) 529-4636 &#13

http://www.yourlawyer.com

&#13
&#13
&#13
&#13
&#13

Multi-Celebration Suit Filed By Property owners Against Bank of America et al

Posted on by


Roseville, California (PRWEB) August 24, 2011

On Wednesday August 17, 2011, United Foreclosure Lawyer Network (UFAN) filed suit in Superior Court in Sacramento, CA (case number 34-2011-00109314) on behalf of more than 100 homeowners against Bank of America and other people alleged by Plaintiffs to be involved in a scheme to defraud and otherwise take benefit of American homeowners.

&#13

According to UFANs managing attorney Kristin Crone, This is a chance for home owners to fight for their rights. And, it will be a fight. The complaint particulars how a vast quantity of property owners nationwide are facing mortgage debts far higher than the value of their homes. Some property owners lost what equity investments they had in their houses when the housing marketplace crashed.

&#13

The lawsuit levies blame for the crash of the mortgage market place against large banks and mortgage lenders. According to the complaint, among 2000 and present, mortgages had been packaged up in pools and the pools have been sold to investors. Because a bank could rapidly recoup amounts spent issuing mortgages by the sale of these pools of mortgages (otherwise known as Residential Mortgage Backed Securities, or RMBS), the banks incentivized mortgage brokers and lending institutions with higher fees for origination (yield spread premiums, origination charges, and discount costs). These fee incentives encouraged the origination of hugely predatory loans to men and women who could not afford the loans extended term, the complaint alleges.

&#13

The complaint alleges that the terms of the loans have been complicated and tough to comprehend even for sophisticated borrowers. A lot of of the loans had a two to five year period of a low fixed interest price and interest only payments. Most home owners were promised a refinance prior to the increased payments due at the end of the fixed rate period. But, when the time came to refinance, in spite of the truth that the monetary scenario of the borrower a lot of times remained the same, no refinance was provided. In some instances, refinances or loan mods were granted but they truly improved the borrowers month-to-month payment and/or necessary a huge money payment up front of $ ten,000 or far more.

&#13

Court documents show that the lead Plaintiff in the case, like several others, was told by Bank of America to quit her mortgage payments in order to be considered for a loan modification. The homeowner stopped her payments and started negotiations for far more fair terms with the bank. Smartly, the homeowner saved money so she could bring her loan existing if negotiations had been not fruitful. The complaint alleges that she was promised her home would not be foreclosed even though she was being regarded for a loan modification. She told bank representatives that she could bring her loan current if it was going to sell. Court documents show that the bank promised her the foreclosure would be postponed. It was not. This client has now permanently lost her property to a third party buyer.

&#13

UFAN plans to bring claims against all of the key banks on behalf of property owners within the subsequent handful of months. Our consumers want to fight for their rights and they are just asking for a fair shake, says Ms. Crone. We are attempting to give them the likelihood to be heard and to try to stay in their homes under affordable loan terms. The banks have been providing everyone the runaround by way of loss mitigation departments that repeatedly shed documents and claim to perform with homeowners whilst selling their residences out from beneath them. Filing suit was a last resort for many of our clients, but the bank produced it appear as if it was the only way to truly get their focus.

&#13

Complementary consultations offered.

&#13

ABOUT UNITED FORECLOSURE Attorney NETWORK

&#13

The United Foreclosure Attorney Network (UFAN) is a Roseville, California-based law firm practicing on the cutting edge of mortgage fraud and foreclosure defense. UFAN represents consumers who have been victims of predatory lending and/or wrongful foreclosure. The committed attorneys and employees at UFAN perform tirelessly to seek justice for fraudulent mortgage practices and fight for the rights of American property owners. For far more details contact toll free of charge 1-866-400-4242.

&#13

This release might constitute attorney advertisement. The data in this release and on the United Foreclosure Lawyer Network (TheUFAN.com) internet site is for basic details purposes only. Absolutely nothing in this release or on the United Foreclosure Attorney Network (TheUFAN.com) website ought to be taken as legal advice. Prior successes are no guarantee of future overall performance. Litigation is inherently uncertain and benefits in litigation are in no way assured.

&#13
&#13
&#13
&#13
&#13

Multi-Party Suit Filed by Homeowners Against JP Morgan Chase et al

Posted on by


Roseville, California (PRWEB) October 27, 2011

On Tuesday October 18, 2011, United Foreclosure Attorney Network (UFAN) filed suit in Superior Court in Martinez, CA (case number C-11-02390) on behalf of many home owners against JP Morgan Chase and other individuals alleged by Plaintiffs to be involved in a scheme to defraud and otherwise take advantage of investors and borrowers.

&#13

The complaint information how the lending practices of JP Morgan Chase led straight to Plaintiffs becoming placed in harmful and predatory loans. Following a loosening of lending restrictions in the 1980s, banks like JP Morgan Chase started originating exotic non-prime mortgages with adjustable interest rates. These risky loans have been often securitized into mortgage backed securities and sold to investors. Since a bank could quickly recoup amounts spent issuing mortgages by the sale of these residential mortgage backed securities (RMBS), banks incentivized mortgage brokers to participate in the scheme with high fees for origination. According to the filing, these charge incentives encouraged full disregard for underwriting requirements which were employed to lure borrowers into extremely predatory loans they could not afford.

&#13

The complaint alleges that Plaintiffs relied on statements produced by JP Morgan Chase personnel and mortgage brokers when they accepted negative loans. Plaintiffs were usually told that they would be in a position to afford high loan amounts and had been promised the capacity to refinance at a later date. It is alleged that in some situations, loan officers blatantly lied to Plaintiffs about the top quality of the loans they had been getting. The complaint alleges that Chase not only knew about these broker practices, but encouraged and incentivized them. A Chase internal memo states, If you do not get Stated/Stated, try resubmitting with slightly greater income. Inch it up $ 500 to see if you can get the findings you want. Do the identical for assets.

&#13

Similarly, the complaint alleges that appraisers were encouraged to inflate home values in order to give borrowers greater loan amounts. The greater the loan amount, the more money JP Morgan Chase was capable to make on the sale of the loan. It is argued that the bank incentivized appraisers to falsify property valuations in order to safe a higher loan to sell to investors. The complaint alleges that Plaintiffs borrowed excessively in reliance on inflated appraisals and other statements.

&#13

Plaintiffs also argue that simply because of the sale of their loans, they did not receive the advantage of the contract for which they bargained. Plaintiffs, believing they would be placed into a mortgage with a traditional Lender/Borrower relationship, later identified that they did not have a lender with whom they could deal. Servicers are not at liberty to make changes to contracts when circumstances are unforeseeably changed. In addition, loan servers have an incentive to foreclose whereas a lender has the incentive to modify a loan if it would be more lucrative in the extended run. Had several property owners had a lender with whom to deal, they could have restructured the mortgage for a more desirable result for each parties. The complaint information how numerous Plaintiffs diligently sought modification of their loans but have been denied merely because the servicer had no authority to grant a modification.

Multi-celebration Suit Filed by Borrowers Against Aurora Bank et al

Posted on by


Roseville, California (PRWEB) November 11, 2011

On Tuesday October 25, 2011, United Foreclosure Lawyer Network (UFAN) filed suit in Superior Court in Sacramento (case # 34-2011-00112919) on behalf of borrowers allegedly injured by the lending practices of Aurora Bank and other people believed to have misled borrowers.

&#13

The complaint alleges that Aurora was one particular of the significant players in a scheme to make quickly, easy income at the expense of proper mortgage underwriting procedures. By packing subprime loans into mortgage backed securities that were sold to investors, a bank could recoup the funds lent quickly. The suit argues that this procedure encouraged lenders and mortgage brokers to aggressively push higher-expense subprime loans on any individual they could convince to sign on the dotted line.

&#13

According to court documents, plaintiffs argue that due to the fact of the sale of their loans, they did not obtain the benefit of the contract for which they bargained. Plaintiffs, believing they would be placed into a standard Lender/Borrower connection, later identified that they did not have a lender with whom they could deal. Servicers are restricted in producing alterations to contracts when situations are unforeseeably changed. Furthermore, loan servicers have an incentive to foreclose whereas a lender has the incentive to modify a loan if it would be much more profitable in the extended run. If numerous of the home owners had been still in the traditional lender/borrower relationship, they could have restructured the mortgage for a far more desirable result for both parties. In the present circumstance, the only entity profiting is the loan servicer. The complaint specifics how many Plaintiffs diligently sought modification of their loans but had been denied either because the servicer had no authority to grant a modification or since the servicer chose not to grant a modification.

LawyersandSettlements.com Reports A 70 Percent Spike In Mortgage Complaints More than Final Year Lawsuits Alleging Bank Misconduct Continue To Be Filed

Posted on by


Santa Cruz, Calif. (PRWEB) October ten, 2012

While the aftermath of the sub-prime mortgage crisis has seen a quantity of massive U.S. banks defending themselves against charges of misconduct, new information reported by LawyersandSettlements.com indicates consumers are still getting impacted by the crisis. Mortgage-associated complaints submitted to the legal news site have continued to improve year-more than-year as readers continue to seek out legal aid in dealing with foreclosures and discriminatory lending practices.

&#13

LawyersandSettlements.com has reported a 70 % jump in mortgage complaints from January through June 2012 compared with the identical period a year ago. In addition, mortgage complaints to the site have risen 114 percent so far this year vs. a comparable period 5 years ago, in 2007. Complaints are submitted to the legal news web site in order to seek legal aid.

&#13

There are three main categories for which mortgage complaints to LawyersandSettlements.com continue to be submitted:

&#13

1. Predatory and Discriminatory Mortgage Lending. One particular instance of a mortgage lawsuit involving discrimination was the current U.S. Division of Justice case involving Wells Fargo (United States v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA (D.D.C.)). The case was the second biggest fair lending settlement in the departments history. As part of the discriminatory lending settlement, Wells Fargo agreed to pay $ 175 million to settle allegations that it charged African-Americans and Hispanics greater costs and prices on mortgages than for Caucasian borrowers with similar credit profiles. Wells Fargo stated its intent to settle the mortgage lawsuit was to keep away from contested litigation, and that it treated all consumers fairly without regard to race or ethnicity. This, in spite of the massive numbers of discriminatory lending victims uncovered by a government investigation.

&#13

In addition to racial discriminatory lending complaints, LawyersandSettlements.com has also received predatory lending complaints from seniors who allege they have been targeted with items ranging from mortgages with an introductory low price (that rises substantially later on), to reverse mortgages that eat up a homeowner’s equitysometimes without the homeowner fully realizing the correct supply of the nonetheless welcomed earnings.

&#13

Wells Fargo was the target of a reverse mortgage lawsuit final year in Chandler v. Wells Fargo &amp Co., Case No. 11-cv-03831, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco). The mortgage lawsuit, which was filed as a class action, is nevertheless pending. It accuses Wells Fargo of disregarding federal rules on reverse mortgages and forcing homeowners into foreclosure instead of giving heirs a likelihood to buy the residences.

&#13

2. Foreclosures. Foreclosure complaints comprise the second category contributing to the rise in mortgage-related complaints submitted at LawyersandSettlements.com. A single foreclosure lawsuit recently filed by Jay Fenello of Woodstock, Georgia (Fenello v. Bank of America, Case No. 1:11-cv-04139-WSD, U.S. District Court, Northern Division, Georgia) alleges Bank of America has been acting in violation of the terms for foreclosure procedure set forth in U.S. et al v. Bank of America Corp., et al (Case No. 1:12-cv-00361-RMC, U.S. District Court, D.C.). In the filing, Fenello’s allegations center on attempts made by Bank of America to foreclose on his home whilst engaging in illegal and unethical practices, including misrepresenting eligibility criteria for loan modifications.

&#13

3. Investment Loss Stemming from Mortgage-backed Securities. The failure of mortgage-backed securities stemming from the sub-prime mortgage meltdown of a couple of years ago has left numerous investors with substantial losses right after becoming advised that such securities have been low-, or even no-danger investments. In re Lehman Brothers Mortgage-based Securities Litigation, Case No. 08-CV-6762, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit have been awarded $ 40 million in damages. LawyersandSettlements.com continues to obtain complaints with regards to mortgage-backed safety monetary losses from its readership.

&#13

About LawyersandSettlements.com&#13

LawyersandSettlements.com provides extensive legal news and crucial info for these impacted by as soon as-in-a-lifetime circumstances involving health-related device lawsuits, individual injury, defective products, California overtime and labor problems or a host of other people. Readers seeking legal assist can request it by completing a form which is distributed to attorneys specializing in these instances. Trial attorneys utilize the internet site to hold abreast of hot legal troubles and settlements as properly as connect with potential customers.

&#13

About On the internet Legal Media&#13

On-line Legal Media owns and operates internet sites delivering information for the basic public and the legal neighborhood. LawyersandSettlements.com, founded in 2001, is an on the web legal news publication with over 2.5 million visitors annually and hundreds of thousands of requests for lawyer assist from its readership. OnlineLegalMarketing.com serves as a portal for trial attorneys to network and to market their firms to other attorneys and legal experts. HealthEffectsOfAsbestos.com gives up-to-date resources and news for those suffering from asbestos exposure and mesothelioma. On the internet Legal Media is primarily based in Santa Cruz, California.

&#13
&#13
&#13
&#13
&#13

A lot more Loan Modification Press Releases

Woman with Bilateral DePuy Pinnacle Hip Implant Alleges Metal Hips are Flawed in Lawsuit Filed by Parker Waichman LLP

Posted on by


New York, New York (PRWEB) June 05, 2013

Parker Waichman LLP, a national law firm dedicated to guarding the rights of victims injured by defective medical devices, has filed a lawsuit on behalf of a lady implanted with two DePuy Pinnacle hips. The lawsuit was filed on March 25th in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Case No. 3:13-cv-01247-K) as portion of the DePuy Pinnacle multidistrict litigation (MDL No. three:11-md-02244). DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. and Johnson &amp Johnson are the Defendants.

&#13

According to the Complaint, the Plaintiff was implanted with a Pinnacle hip on her left side in January 2007, and then had another Pinnacle hip implanted on her correct side in December 2008. The lawsuit alleges that the implants caused complications, which includes extreme pain, weakness and elevated chromium and cobalt levels in the womans bloodstream. The symptoms have been stated to have grown so severe that she needed to undergo a revision surgery to correct the troubles. Allegedly, the Defendants had been conscious of the potential for these dangers but failed to disclose them to the Plaintiff, her doctor or the public. The Plaintiff is suing for, amongst other factors, pain and suffering, emotional distress and financial loss due to lost wages and healthcare costs.

&#13

The lawsuit alleges that the Pinnacle is flawed simply because the metal-on-metal design causes the shedding of chromium and cobalt particles, which are then released into the physique. On January 17 of this year, the U.S. Meals and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a Security Alert that acknowledged these dangers, issuing new suggestions for all-metal hip individuals. The agency advised that those with implants undergo physical exams, diagnostics imaging and metal-ion testing when necessary. In that very same alert, the FDA also proposed new, stricter suggestions that would call for makers to prove that their devices are safe and successful by means of clinical testing this strategy is referred to as premarket approval. The existing approval route, recognized as the 510(k), only calls for device makers to show that their product is comparable to a previously approved device already on the marketplace.

&#13

Parker Waichman LLP continues to offer you totally free legal consultations to victims of DePuy Pinnacle and other metal-on-metal hip implant injuries. If you or a loved a single have seasoned premature failure of your implant, or other overall health troubles related with the Pinnacle or other metal-on-metal hip replacement device, please get in touch with their office by visiting the firm’s DePuy Pinnacle hip implant lawsuits web page at yourlawyer.com. Cost-free case evaluations are also available by calling 1 800 LAW Information (1-800-529-4636).

&#13

Get in touch with: &#13

Parker Waichman LLP &#13

Gary Falkowitz, Managing Lawyer &#13

(800) LAW-Information &#13

(800) 529-4636 &#13

http://www.yourlawyer.com

&#13
&#13
&#13
&#13
&#13

Find A lot more Administrator Press Releases

Irvine Law Group, LLP has filed a Multi-Million Dollar Lawsuit Against a Loan Modification Firm and the Company’s Lawyers for Alleged Loan Modification Fraud

Posted on by


Irvine, CA (PRWEB) September 19, 2012

Southern California law firm of Irvine Law Group, LLP has filed a 150-page civil lawsuit in Superior Court of California, County of Orange (Case No.: 30-2012-00578562) against defendants: Consumer Protection Help Coalition, Inc., (DE) Gary Lane, a California lawyer Jose Arturo Abad Vega (also recognized as Pepe Abad, and Pepi Abad) and other named people, alleging that defendants operate “an illegal mortgage modification scheme”. Plaintiff’s lawyer, Rod Bidgoli, a senior partner at the firm stated that the multi-million dollar lawsuit alleges 17 diverse causes of action against the various defendants, like: Fraud, Conspiracy to Commit Fraud Charging Illegal Advance Costs for Loan Modification Intentional Misrepresentation Unfair, Deceptive and Fraudulent Enterprise Practices Violation of the Shoppers Legal Treatments Act Illegal Use of Runners and Cappers and 12 other causes of action.

&#13

The lawsuit alleges that defendants created misrepresentations and assurances to Plaintiff that they would modify her mortgage and acquire a reduction of her loan principal, and cease the foreclosure of her property. Plaintiff claims that she paid the defendants thousands of dollars in advance charges, but no loan modification was performed for her, and as a result she lost her house in foreclosure.

&#13

The lawsuit additional alleges that defendants misrepresented CPAC as a “Federally Registered Non Profit Law Clinic, even though CPAC has no federal registration,” and that CPAC is not registered either as a law corporation or a “Non-Profit Legal Clinic” with California Attorney General’s office, the State Bar of California, or any other governmental or regulatory agency.

&#13

When asked about the case, Mr. Bidgoli declined to comment on the specifics of the case other than what is contained in the legal complaint, due to the fact of pending litigation. The civil complaint nonetheless alleges that there had been felony criminal charges filed against defendant Pepi Abad in Orange County Superior Court (Case No.: 11CF1447) stemming from an illegal mortgage modification scam involving Mr. Abad, and that Mr. Abad has pled Nolo Contendere (no contest) to violation of California Civ. Code Sec. 2945.four(a) which tends to make it illegal and unlawful for a foreclosure consultant to collect advance costs.

&#13

A declaration attached to the civil complaint which was originally filed with the Court in the criminal case by the office of California Lawyer General, Kamala Harris, in help of the arrest warrant for Abad, it was stated that: “The total quantity of upfront charges for loan modification services paid to HOA for the period November 2007 to November 2008 exceeded $ three,600,000”. (In the declaration HOA is identified as the d.b.a. for defendant Abad and his former partner, Dean E. Toro).

&#13

Mr. Bidgoli stated that they have a extremely sturdy case against the defendants and he looks forward to taking this case to trial. He also warned the public that they must conduct a thorough investigation of anybody that claims they can do loan modifications for a fee, even attorneys, law firms and non-earnings.

&#13

Beware of Foreclosure Rescue Scams – Assist Is Free of charge. If you require assistance with a loan modification, pay a visit to http://www.makinghomeaffordable.gov which is a site set up by the government to aid residence owners. Also if you are going to pay an lawyer, or a business for loan modification, verify them out initial by contacting the Federal Trade Commission, State Bar, or the Department of Customer Affairs.

&#13
&#13
&#13
&#13
&#13

Actos Lawsuits: Bernstein Liebhard LLP Notes Far more Than 1,500 Situations Now Filed in Federal Litigation

Posted on by


New York, New York (PRWEB) June 02, 2013

Court documents indicate that more than 1,500 Actos lawsuit claims alleging bladder cancer are now pending in a federal litigation underway in the U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana, Bernstein Liebhard LLP reports.

&#13

According to court records, an update on the number of Actos filings in the federal litigation was presented at a May 23rd status conference, which also addressed troubles associated to the status of discovery and the scheduling of bellwether trials in the litigation. Lawsuits filed in this proceeding allege the possible for long-term use of Actos, a type two diabetes drug manufactured by Takeda Pharmaceuticals, to trigger or worsen bladder cancer. (In re: Actos Solution Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2299)

&#13

As we continue to receive inquiries about prospective Actos lawsuits from individuals who allege extended-term use of the drug triggered their bladder cancer, we are pleased to see this litigation moving forward, says Bernstein Liebhard LLP, nationwide law firm representing the victims of defective drugs and health-related devices. The Firm is at the moment offering free Actos bladder cancer lawsuit evaluations to individuals who developed bladder cancer right after utilizing the medication for an extended period of time.

&#13

Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuit Allegations

&#13

The federal multidistrict litigation for Actos bladder cancer lawsuits was produced in the U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana in December 2011, after the U.S. Meals and Drug Administration issued an alert warning the public that long-term use of the medication might increase a individuals threat for establishing bladder cancer.* There are now 1,500 instances pending in in the Western District of Louisiana, exactly where the proceeding continues to move forward. According to court documents, the next status conference in the litigation has been scheduled for June 20, 2013. Court records further indicate the first bellwether trials for the Actos bladder cancer litigation have been scheduled as effectively, with the initial trial is slated to begin on January 27, 2014, with the second to adhere to on April 14, 2014.

&#13

In addition to the federal litigation, Bloomberg.com reported on May 1st that claims filed more than the medication employed to manage blood-sugar levels in type 2 diabetes sufferers are pending in state litigations in Illinois and California.**

&#13

Individuals who took Actos and developed bladder cancer following lengthy-term use of the drug may possibly be eligible to seek compensation for medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering and other damages. Understand more about how to file an Actos lawsuit by going to Bernstein Liebhard LLPs web site or by calling a single of the Firms Actos lawyers at 800-511-5092.

&#13

*FDA, June 15, 2011 fda.gov/drugs/drugsafety/ucm259150.htm&#13

**bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-01/takeda-gets-six-five-million-diabetes-drug-verdict-thrown-out.html

&#13

About Bernstein Liebhard LLP

&#13

Bernstein Liebhard LLP is a New York-primarily based law firm exclusively representing injured persons in complex individual and class action lawsuits nationwide since 1993, which includes these who have been harmed by harmful drugs, defective health-related devices and customer goods. The firm has been named by The National Law Journal to the Plaintiffs Hot List, recognizing the top plaintiffs firms in the nation, for the previous ten consecutive years.

&#13

Bernstein Liebhard LLP&#13

10 East 40th Street&#13

New York, New York 10016&#13

800-511-5092

&#13

Attorney Advertising.