Legal Opinion

In re: Philips Recalled CPAP, Bi-Level PAP, and Mechanical Ventilator Products Litigation; Graham v. Philips, et al.

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided January 16, 2026No. 2:22-cv-00224Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ) IN RE: PHILIPS RECALLED CPAP, ) BI-LEVEL PAP, AND MECHANICAL ) VENTILATOR PRODUCTS ) Master Docket: Misc. No. 21-1230 LITIGATION ) ) ) MDL No. 3014 This Document Relates to: ) ) Graham v. Philips, et al., #22-224 ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION I. Introduction The Graham case, Civ. No. 22-224, was filed in a Kentucky state court and names Gould’s Discount Medical, LLC (“Gould’s”), a durable medical equipment (“DME”) middleman, as one of the defendants. Defendants Philips RS North America LLC, Koninklijke Philips N.V.,…

2Cases cited44 opinions

  1. Piper Aircraft Co. v. ReynoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MottleySupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  3. Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-LarrainSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Zambelli Fireworks Manufacturing Co. v. WoodCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
  5. James F. Boyer and Mary R. Boyer v. Snap-On Tools Corporation, Kenneth Baldwin and Keith A. Kaiser. Appeal of James F. Boyer and Mary R. BoyerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990

39 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