Legal Opinion

FREY v. BAYER CORPORATION

District Court, M.D. Georgia

Decided October 9, 2020No. 3:20-cv-00041Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATHENS DIVISION KIMBERLY FREY, * Plaintiff, * vs. * CASE NO. 3:20-CV-41 (CDL) BAYER CORPORATION, et al., * Defendants. * O R D E R Kimberly Frey alleges that she suffered injuries caused by Defendants’ Essure product, an implantable birth control device. Defendants assert that all of Frey’s claims are preempted by federal law because Essure is a Class III medical device and was approved for sale by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration through its premarket approval process. As discussed below, the Court denies Defendants’…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs' Legal CommitteeSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  4. Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2008
  5. Watts v. Florida International UniversityCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2007

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API