Plaintiffs Lawyers Ready to Battle Over Allegedly Defective 3M Earplugs
Lawyers predict thousands of lawsuits to be filed on behalf of U.S. service members who allege that 3M's earplugs caused hearing loss.
February 13, 2019 at 06:23 PM
5 minute read
Lawyers are gearing up to file thousands of lawsuits on behalf of U.S. military members in a battle over allegedly defective earplugs that 3M sold for more than a decade.
So far, 3M faces more than 50 lawsuits by individual service members, primarily veterans, who allege its dual-ended Combat Arms Earplugs, used in both training and in combat, had a defective design that caused them hearing loss and ringing in the ears, called tinnitus. 3M was the exclusive supplier of earplugs to the U.S. military from 2003 to 2012. More than 800,000 former service members now suffer from hearing damage, according to the lawsuits.
“The number of potential plaintiffs will be massive,” said Mikal Watts of Watts Guerra in San Antonio, who filed a lawsuit Monday on behalf of a retired Army sergeant who now wears hearing aids. Watts predicted that several hundred thousand people could sue. “There were other products available that could have done the job, but 3M made a king's ransom perpetrating a massive fraud on the Department of Defense and hundreds of thousands of patriotic men and women who risked their lives.”
A spokeswoman for 3M, which agreed to pay $9.1 million last year to settle similar allegations by the U.S. Department of Justice, refused to comment on the lawsuits. “3M has great respect for the brave men and women who protect us around the world,” wrote Fanna Haile-Selassie in an email. “We have a long history of serving the U.S. military, and we continue to sell products, including safety products, to help our troops and support their missions.”
On Monday, Kim Branscome, a Los Angeles partner at Kirkland & Ellis, appeared before the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to represent 3M in all the cases, filed in eight states including California, Georgia and Texas. Branscome obtained a defense verdict last year on behalf of Johnson & Johnson in a case alleging its talcum powder products caused a woman's mesothelioma. She also has represented General Motors in its ignition switch litigation and BP in lawsuits brought over the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
Plaintiffs lawyers Rick Paul of Paul LLP of Kansas City, Missouri, and William Sieben of Minneapolis-based Schwebel, Goetz & Sieben moved last month to coordinate the 3M cases into multidistrict litigation in Minnesota. They filed a case Jan. 24 on behalf of a former Marine who now wears hearing aids. Other lawyers have pushed for Missouri or Louisiana; 3M's response is due Feb. 19.
The MDL panel has scheduled a hearing on the cases for its March 28 hearing in Washington, D.C.
3M discontinued the earplugs in 2015. One side of the earplugs, which was olive green, blocked all noise, while the other side, which was yellow, reduced loud noise but allowed service members to hear conversations and commands. The cases allege that Aearo Technologies, the original manufacturer, which 3M purchased in 2008 for $1.2 billion, knew as early as 2000 that the earplugs had a design defect that caused them to loosen, according to the lawsuits. Aearo allegedly used its own laboratory and employees for the testing, and, when the results failed to meet the standards required under federal noise regulations, came up with a quick fix that would help it obtain U.S. government contracts. Further, the suits allege, 3M failed to warn the U.S. military or its service members of the defect, or instruct them on how to use the quick fix for themselves.
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs now spends more than $1 billion a year treating hearing damage in service members, the suits say.
“These are people who served our country honorably in very dangerous conditions and are suffering life-changing injuries as a result of the company's misconduct,” said Travis Lenkner of Chicago's Keller Lenkner, who has filed nine lawsuits so far and has 1,000 clients. “And the nature and extent of the injuries bears that out.”
The suits, which seek punitive damages, mimic allegations in a whistleblower suit filed in 2016 against 3M by a competitor. 3M had sued the competitor, Moldex-Metric Inc., for patent infringement, but U.S. District Judge Joan Ericksen of the District of Minnesota dismissed the case. Moldex-Metric then sued 3M for malicious prosecution and brought the False Claims Act case, in which the DOJ intervened in 2018.
Under the DOJ's settlement agreement, which reimbursed the U.S. government and compensated Moldex-Metric, 3M did not admit liability. Plaintiffs lawyers were undeterred.
“These cases would be strong cases without the fact of the qui tam settlement,” Lenkner said. “The allegations are true, and we intend to prove them at trial, wherever and whenever given the opportunity. But the added fact of the government's act to join the whistleblower case, and 3M agreeing to settle immediately upon the government's intervention, are probative, even if the settlement itself did not contain an admission of liability.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFrozen-Potato Producers Face Profiteering Allegations in Surge of Antitrust Class Actions
3 minute readState Appellate Court Upholds $149M Punitive Damages Award Against Hyatt
4 minute readThe Defense Bar Is Feeling the Strain: Busy Med Mal Trial Schedules Might Be Phila.'s 'New Normal'
7 minute read'New Circumstances': Winston & Strawn Seek Expedited Relief in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Groundbreaking Contingency Cap Ballot Measure
- 2OpenAI Tells Court It Will Seek to Consolidate Copyright Suits Under MDL
- 34th Circuit Allows State Felon Voting Ban Challenge to Go Forward
- 4Class Actions Claim Progressive Undervalues Totaled Cars
- 5How the Trump II Administration Can Combat Antisemitism
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250