The complaint further states the FDA letter, written in Aug. 2006, advised defendants they were promoting drugs “without proper clearance” and possibly more than 26 adverse drug experiences went unreported.

The updated FDA letter in February 2007 states, “Significant deficiencies were found in the operations of your firm’s quality control unit, and as a result there is no assurance that many drug products manufactured and released into interstate commerce by your firm have the identity, strength, quality and purity that they purport to possess.”

In April of 2008, Digitek’s manufactures issued a recall because the pills contained twice the amount of the active ingredient.  In response to recall, the plaintiff argues, “Defendants placed tens of thousands of patients, including Decedent, unnecessarily at risk of serious injury and/or death and may have caused them to suffer personal injuries and harm, including medical expenses, anxiety and fear induced from ingesting the defective and misbranded drug.”

In the Digitek lawsuit, Butts filed the following charges: “violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, strict product liability including design and manufacturing defects, failure to warn, breach of express and implied warranty, negligence, fraud, negligence per se, and negligent misrepresentation.”

Butts is also desiring “damages for pecuniary losses, all hospital, medical and funeral expenses, loss of advice and counsel, loss of spouse’s services and parent’s services, mental anguish, loss of companionship and society, and loss of inheritance.”

SOURCE: Digitek Recall › Texas woman sues Digitek manufacturer for husband’s death

According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the agreement says Actavis cannot resume its practices until it conforms to “the agency’s good manufacturing practice.” Actavis must improve its labs, facilities, and equipment.

Actavis has faced numerous lawsuits over the recalled drug Digitek. One such lawsuit includes the death of a patient and claims that Digitek is an unsafe and flawed drug.

Actavis would not comment if the FDA agreement had influenced the Digitek lawsuits or not.

SOURCE: Digitek Recall › Actavis N.J. plant agrees with FDA

Across the United States, around sixty Digitek recall law suits have been filed in federal courts. The defendants include the following: Actavis Totowa, LLC, Actavis, Inc., Actavis Elizabeth, LLC, Actavis US, Mylan, Inc., Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Mylan Laboratories, Inc., Mylan Bertek Pharmaceuticals and UDL Laboratories, Inc.

Collective cases will be transferred to Judge Joseph R. Goodwin.

According to the news report, under federal court procedures, the purposes of transferring all cases to one judge for pretrial rulings eliminates duplicative discovery and inconsistent pretrial rulings. Unlike a “class action,” where all suit are tried together, the MDL relates to pre-trial actions only. If a resolution or settlement is not reached, the cases go back to their respective districts for trial.

SOURCE: Digitek Recall › MDL consolidates Digitek recall cases