In re Testosterone Replacement Therapy Prods. Liab. Litig.

Docket Number14 C 1748,MDL 2545
Decision Date01 November 2023
PartiesIn re Testosterone Replacement Therapy Products Liability Litigation v. AbbVie Inc., Case No. 15 C 9699, This document applies to Bunting and Reynolds v. AbbVie Inc., Case No. 17 C 4117
CourtU.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois

MATTHEW F. KENNELLY, District Judge.

Plaintiffs in this multidistrict litigation (MDL) proceeding allege that they suffered either arterial cardiovascular injuries or injuries related to blood clots in the veins (venous thromboembolisms) as a result of taking prescription testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) drugs. Defendants AbbVie Inc., AbbVie Products LLC, Abbott Laboratories, Inc. and Unimed Pharmaceuticals, Inc (collectively, AbbVie) manufacture AndroGel, one of the TRT products at issue in this litigation. Before the Court are AbbVie's motions to exclude expert testimony and for summary judgment in two cases: Bunting v. AbbVie Inc., No. 15 C 9699, and Reynolds v. AbbVie Inc., No. 17 C 4117. Juliana Bunting alleges that her late husband Kenneth Bunting's use of AndroGel caused his death from a heart attack in April 2014. Tony Reynolds alleges that his use of AndroGel caused him to suffer a stroke in January 2014.

AbbVie has moved under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 to exclude the testimony of expert witness Dr. Hossein Ardehali in the Reynolds case and the testimony of expert witness Dr. Joshua Sharlin in both Bunting and Reynolds. AbbVie also has moved for summary judgment on all of the plaintiffs' remaining claims or, in the alternative, on certain categories of damages that AbbVie contends are limited by state law. For the following reasons the Court grants AbbVie's motion to exclude Dr Ardehali's marketing opinion testimony but otherwise denies the motion to exclude. The Court grants AbbVie's motions for summary judgment with respect to the availability of punitive and noneconomic damages in Reynolds and punitive damages in Bunting but otherwise denies the motions for summary judgment.

Background

The Court assumes familiarity with the background as set out in its prior case management orders and therefore discusses only those details relevant to the motions at issue. The facts are undisputed except where otherwise stated.

Kenneth Bunting began using AndroGel in 2013 and died from a heart attack in April 2014. Juliana Bunting filed suit in October 2014 as the representative of her late husband's estate and on her own behalf. She has asserted wrongful death and survival claims of strict liability, negligence, breach of warranty, fraud, redhibition, consumer protection, and unjust enrichment. She also seeks punitive damages. AbbVie moved for summary judgment on all claims. In February 2023, the Court granted summary judgment for AbbVie on all of the Estate's claims and on Bunting's wrongful death action to the extent it is premised on claims of unjust enrichment, redhibition, and breach of warranty. See In re Testosterone Replacement Therapy Prod. Liab. Litig., No. 14 C 1748, 2023 WL 1800079, at *8 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 7, 2023) (hereinafter CMO 192). The Court denied summary judgment on Bunting's wrongful death action as it related to the underlying strict liability, negligence, fraud, and consumer protection claims. Id.

Tony Reynolds began using AndroGel on January 15, 2014 after his doctor, Garvin Chastain, prescribed it to treat fatigue and low libido. On January 21, 2014, Reynolds suffered a stroke. Dr. Chastain testified during his deposition that he was aware of some studies regarding the cardiovascular risk of TRT products but that he believed the evidence was inconclusive. He also gave conflicting answers regarding whether a warning about AndroGel's cardiovascular risks would have affected his decision to prescribe the drug for Reynolds.

Reynolds had a number of preexisting conditions that put him at risk for adverse cardiovascular events such as a stroke. Over Thanksgiving 2013, before Reynolds began using AndroGel, he experienced dysarthria (slurred speech), which can be a stroke symptom. Brain scans taken after Reynolds's stroke in 2014 showed evidence that Reynolds may have had a prior transient ischemic attack, sometimes referred to as a "mini-stroke."

Reynolds filed suit in April 2017 asserting claims for strict liability, negligence, breach of warranty, fraud, redhibition, consumer protection, and unjust enrichment. He also seeks punitive damages. AbbVie moved for summary judgment on all claims. In February 2023, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of AbbVie on Reynolds's redhibition, unjust enrichment, and consumer protection claims but allowed his remaining claims to proceed. See In re Testosterone Replacement Therapy Prod. Liab. Litig., No. 14 C 1748, 2023 WL 1800078, at *5 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 7, 2023).

In support of their claims, both Bunting and Reynolds rely on two expert witnesses: Dr. Hossein Ardehali, a cardiovascular medicine expert, and Dr. Joshua Sharlin, a regulatory expert. Dr. Ardehali's opinion is that AndroGel was a substantial cause of Kenneth Bunting's heart attack and Reynolds's stroke. Dr. Ardehali's report, however, made no reference to Reynolds's dysarthria incident or the brain imaging evidence. Dr. Sharlin's opinion is that AbbVie should have included a warning regarding the cardiovascular risks of AndroGel and that it failed to prudently respond to warning signs that the drug was dangerous. To reach this conclusion, Dr. Sharlin relied in part on data from the FDA's Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, which tracks reports of adverse events related to various medications. Dr. Sharlin asserts that AbbVie ignored certain FAERS data that a prudent pharmaceutical manufacturer would have considered when monitoring the safety of its drug. Specifically, he states that AbbVie considered only adverse events connected with AndroGel and disregarded adverse events associated with similar TRT products.

Discussion
A. Admissibility of expert testimony

1. Dr. Ardehali's specific causation opinion

The parties agree that Tennessee law governs Reynolds's claims. Under Tennessee law, a plaintiff must show that "the defendant's conduct was 'a substantial factor in bringing about the harm being complained of.'" Barnes v. Kerr Corp., 418 F.3d 583, 588-89 (6th Cir. 2005) (quoting McClenahan v. Cooley, 806 S.W.2d 767, 775 (Tenn. 1991)) (internal quotations omitted). The parties refer to this element of Reynolds's claim as specific causation. To satisfy the specific causation requirement, Reynolds relies on the expert testimony of Dr. Ardehali. AbbVie argues that Dr. Ardehali's testimony that AndroGel was a substantial cause of Reynolds's stroke should be excluded under Rule 702 because it is unreliable. Specifically, AbbVie contends that Dr. Ardehali failed to account for the fact that Reynolds likely suffered stroke symptoms and/or a "mini-stroke" before he began taking AndroGel and the fact that Reynolds took AndroGel for only five to seven days before his stroke.

Under Rule 702, which governs the admissibility of expert testimony, a court must evaluate "(1) the proffered expert's qualifications; (2) the reliability of the expert's methodology; and (3) the relevance of the expert's testimony." Gopalratnam v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 877 F.3d 771, 779 (7th Cir. 2017). Only the second consideration is at issue in this case. To determine the reliability of expert testimony, Rule 702 directs courts to consider whether the expert's opinion is "based on sufficient facts or data," whether the opinion is "the product of reliable principles and methods," and whether that methodology has been "reliably applied . . . to the facts of the case." Fed.R.Evid. 702(b)-(d). This analysis, however, must focus "solely on principles and methodology, not on the conclusions that they generate." Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 595 (1993); see also Stollings v. Ryobi Techs., Inc., 725 F.3d 753, 765 (7th Cir. 2013) ("Rule 702's requirement that the district judge determine that the expert used reliable methods does not ordinarily extend to the reliability of the conclusions those methods produce-that is, whether the conclusions are unimpeachable."). That is because "[t]he jury must still be allowed to play its essential role as the arbiter of the weight and credibility of expert testimony." Stollings, 725 F.3d at 765.

Dr. Ardehali's expert report explained that Reynolds had a number of preexisting risk factors for an ischemic stroke, including "poorly controlled diabetes, being overweight, and smoking." Ardehali Expert Rep. at 13. Dr. Ardehali concluded, however, that "testosterone therapy was a substantial factor in Mr. Reynolds' catastrophic stroke" and that "[b]ut for the use of AndroGel testosterone product, Mr. Reynolds would not have experienced the stroke." Id. Specifically, Dr. Ardehali opined that AndroGel was the catalyst that, combined with Reynolds's underlying conditions, led to the stroke that Reynolds suffered on January 14. See id. at 13-14 (explaining that AndroGel "caused a hypercoagulable state" which "increased risk of plaque rupture" and "caused increased risk of larger thrombus formation" and that the adverse effects of AndroGel were intensified by Reynolds's "conditions of obesity and hyperinflammation"). In sum, Dr. Ardehali's opinion is that "AndroGel therapy was a substantial factor in causing [Reynolds's] vascular event because of its effect on coagulation under circumstances of a systemic chronic inflammatory disease." Id.

AbbVie argues that Dr....

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT