Legal Opinion

Hughes v. Boston Scientific Corp.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided January 21, 2011No. 09-60925PublishedCited by 98 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

W. EUGENE DAVIS, Circuit Judge:

This appeal requires us to determine the extent to which Appellant Jan Hughes’s state tort claims seeking recovery for injuries allegedly caused by a medical device manufactured by Appellee Boston Scientific Corporation (“Boston Scientific”) are preempted by the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (“MDA”), 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq., to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act of 1938 (“FDCA”), 52 Stat. 1040. The district court granted Boston Scientific’s motion for summary judgment, holding that all of Hughes’s claims are preempted. Hughes now appeals that ruling,…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  2. Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
  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. Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLCSupreme Court of the United States · 2005

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

3Cited by98 opinions

  1. Richard Stengel v. Medtronic IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
  2. Alton Bass v. Stryker CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2012
  3. Eleanor Fulgenzi v. PLIVA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013
  4. Caplinger v. Medtronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2015
  5. Howard v. Zimmer, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2013

93 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