As you may recall, in January 2020, the California Department of Justice announced that Johnson & Johnson (Ethicon, Inc) pay $344 million for “falsely and deceptively” marketing mesh devices used to treat stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. The California Attorney General claimed the ruling as the first time a court of law found Johnson & Johnson "did indeed engage in illegal false and deceptive business practices,” by intentionally concealing the risks of its pelvic mesh implant devices.
After this ruling, many AUGS members expressed concern that the physician voice was missing from this case, as well as the fact that there was misrepresentation of the court regarding this decision and how it may impact care for women with stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. With this growing groundswell and input from SGS and AAGL, AUGS leadership decided to proceed with developing a brief amicus curiae with the court of appeal in support of the defendant. This brief was reviewed and is supported by AAGL, SGS, and SUFU.
On Monday, AUGS officially filed an application for leave to file brief amicus curiae in support of defendants and proposed a brief of amicus curiae of interested medical societies. We have posted this brief on the AUGS Website for your review and consideration.
As the legal proceeding continues, we will keep the membership informed of any next steps and outcomes from this effort. As always, please feel free to share your input and perspectives with the Board via email at email@example.com.
Holly E. Richter, PhD, MD