Bijan Esfandiari
Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, PC - Los Angeles
10940 Wilshire Blvd Fl 17
Los Angeles, CA 90024
(310) 207-3233
www.baumhedlundlaw.com
Bijan Esfandiari is a pharmaceutical product liability litigation attorney and partner at Baum Hedlund Aristei & Goldman in Los Angeles. He has successfully represented clients in state and federal courts across the nation at both the trial and appellate level in wrongful death and catastrophic personal injury cases.
Bijan has had the privilege of participating in cases that have shaped and developed the law for the benefit of injured victims and consumers of pharmaceutical products. In one such case, the Court agreed with his arguments and, in an issue of first impression, held that drug manufacturers owe an affirmative duty to warn regarding risks associated with children’s off-label use. Bijan’s published cases have also exposed reprehensible corporate conduct. For example, a federal court in Pennsylvania noted that “internal documents suggest that Defendant acted with a wanton and willful disregard for the safety of its consumers,†and thus allowed Bijan’s clients to proceed with their punitive damages claims.
He has also been at the forefront of the preemption battle and has successfully argued against preemption (drug/device manufacturer immunity) in numerous cases. Most recently, in 2014, Bijan successfully briefed and argued the first and only medical device preemption case to be heard by Maryland Court of Special Appeals, wherein in an issue of first impression, the three judge panel unanimously agreed with Bijan’s arguments that plaintiff’s claims were not preempted and held that plaintiff could proceed with his claims against the medical device manufacturer. McCormick v. Medtronic, Inc., 219 Md. App.485, 101 A.3d 467, 474 (2014) (“We shall hold that federal law does not expressly or impliedly preempt the plaintiffs’ claims concerning misrepresentations or express warranties that the manufacturer may have made in voluntary communications with the public or with members of the medical profession.â€).
Similarly, Bijan successfully briefed and argued the first drug preemption case to ever be heard by the United States Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal in Chicago, Illinois. In the landmark decision, the three judge panel of the Seventh Circuit unanimously agreed with Bijan’s arguments and held that plaintiffs’ claims against the drug manufacturer were not preempted by federal law. Mason v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.3d. 387 (7th Cir. 2010). The significance of these landmark rulings is they ensure that drug and medical device companies who engage in deceptive or impermissible conduct are not entitled to immunity (preemption) and must be held accountable for monetary damages in a court of law for any injuries that they or their products cause to consumers.
In addition to the previously mentioned appellate decisions, Bijan has likewise successfully opposed preemption in numerous other state and federal trial courts, including Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.Supp.2d 1225 (S.D.Ind. 2008); Knipe v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 583 F.Supp.2d 553 (E.D.Pa 2008); Forst v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 639 F.Supp.2d 948 (E.D.Wis. 2009); Dorsett v. Sandoz, Inc., 699 F.Supp.2d 1142 (C.D.Cal. 2010); and Cabana v. Stryker Biotech LLC, 2012 WL 3876245 (Cal.Super.Ct., Aug. 20, 2012). Bijan also co-authored amicus briefs in support of the respondents in the Supreme Court’s landmark cases Wyeth v. Levine, 129 S.Ct. 1187 (2009) and Pliva v. Mensing, 131 S.Ct. 2567 (2011).
Bijan has written numerous articles, including “Complete Tort Immunity For Drug Manufacturers Is Bad For The Public Health,†published in Mealey’s™ Litigation Report, “Preemption’s Requiem in the Wake of Wyeth v. Levine,†Mealey’s™ Emerging Drugs & Devices and “Levine To Mensing — A Journey From The Sublime To The Ridiculous,†Mealey’s™ Emerging Drugs & Devices. Most recently, he co-wrote “Challenging Medical Ghostwriting in US Courts,†published in PLoS Medicine.
Practice Areas
Class Actions
Complex and Multi-District Litigation
Consumer Fraud Litigation
Defective Medical Devices
Personal Injury
Prescription Drugs
Pharmaceutical Drug Product Liability
Zantac Cancer Lawsuit
Product Liability Law
Whistleblower Protection
Wrongful Death Law
Education
University of California, Los Angeles (B.A., cum laude, 1999)
University of California School of Law, Los Angeles, California (J.D., 2002)
Court Admissions
California, 2002
U.S. District Court, Central District of California, 2002
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 2002
U.S. District Court, Southern District of California, 2005
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, 2005
U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, 2008
U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan, 2008
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, 2008
U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, 2008
U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 2009
U.S. Supreme Court, 2011
U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, 2012
U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit, 2013
Awards and Honors
The National Trial Lawyers Top 100 Trial Lawyers
Selected to: Southern California Super Lawyers®2017 2020
Selected to: Southern California Super Lawyers® Rising Stars, 2009 2016
Up-and-Coming 100: 2016 Southern California Rising Stars Top List
Avvo.com Superb Score 10 out of 10
Nation’s Top One Percent, National Association of Distinguished Counsel
Listed, The Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyersâ„¢
Member, UCLA School of Law Moot Court Honors Program
Member
State Bar of California
American Association for Justice: Leader’s Forum; Medtronic InFUSE® Litigation Group; Products Liability Section; Qui Tam Litigation Group; STEP-Toxic, Environmental and Pharmaceutical Torts Section
Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles
Member, UCLA Journal of International Law & Foreign Affairs
Contributing Author to The Docket, a UCLA School of Law Publication
Presentations/ Speeches
Program: Medtronic InFUSE Litigation GroupTopic: Status of Cases That Have Survived Preemption Motions and Discovery Strategies and Different Venue OptionsOrganization: American Association for JusticeEvent: 2014 AAJ Annual ConventionLocation: Baltimore, MarylandDate: July 26 30, 2014
Topic: “Status of the Infuse Litigationâ€Organization: Mass Torts Made PerfectEvent: Medtronic Infuse Litigation UpdateLocation: Las Vegas, NevadaDate: October 10, 2013
Topic: Panel: CorruptionOrganization: Selling SicknessEvent: Selling Sickness, People Before Profits, Session VILocation: Washington, D.C.Date: February 20 22, 2013
Topic: “Living with the Mensing Decisionâ€Organization: Mass Torts Made PerfectEvent: Actos and Pelvic Mesh Litigation UpdateLocation: Philadelphia, PennsylvaniaDate: February 8, 2012
Topic: “Legal Implications of Pharmaceutical Ghostwritingâ€Organization: Faculty of Law’s ConferenceEvent: The Ethics of Ghost Authorship in Biomedical Research: Concerns and Remedies WorkshopLocation: University of TorontoDate: May 4, 2011
Topic: “Oral Advocacy Competition Participantâ€Organization: American Bar AssociationEvent: ABA Forum on Communications Law Media Advocacy WorkshopLocation: Key Largo, FloridaDate: February 8, 2007
Topic: “Strategies for Litigating Copyright Cases When Infringement is Uncontestedâ€Organization: San Fernando Valley Bar AssociationEvent: Intellectual Property, Entertainment Law & Internet Law SectionLocation: Woodland Hills, CaliforniaDate: February 17, 2006
Author
Challenging Medical Ghostwriting in US Courts PLOS Medicine, January 24, 2012
Reason Magazine Perpetuates False Information About Safety and Efficacy of Antidepressants, September 30, 2011
Levine To Mensing — A Journey From The Sublime To The Ridiculous LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Emerging Drugs & Devices, Volume 16, Issue #16, August 18, 2011
Outsmarting the ‘Learned-Intermediary Doctrine’ Defense The Advocate, February 2010, pg 62
Preemption’s Requiem in the Wake of Wyeth v. Levine LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Emerging Drugs & Devices, Volume 14, Issue #10, May, 2009
Complete Tort Immunity For Drug Manufacturers Is Bad For The Public Health: A Commentary On Colacicco v. Apotex And Other Recent Preemption Decisions LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Litigation Report: Antidepressant Report, Volume 4, Issue #10, May, 2008
Caught Without a License Marketing Management Marketing Law, November/December, 2007
YouTube Sued: It’s a Riot American Bar Association, Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section (TIPS) Media Privacy Committee Newsletter, Fall, 2006
Camisoles: Providing Thin Protection, IP Law 360, September 28, 2006
Grokster: Inducing Further Litigation ABA Tort Trial & Practice Section, Intellectual Property Law Committee Newsletter, Fall, 2005
Pro Bono and Civic Activities
Member, Representative Assembly of the Palms Neighborhood Council
Public Counsel Volunteer Attorney, 2007
Published Cases
Hricik v. Stryker Biotech, LLC, 89 F. Supp. 3d 694 (E.D. Pa. 2015) (granting plaintiff’s motion to remand the case back to state court)
Boutte v. Stryker Biotech, LLC, 67 F. Supp. 3d 732, 734 (M.D. La. 2014) (denying defendant’s motion to dismiss and permitting plaintiff to proceed with his products liability claims against medical device manufacturer)
McCormick v. Medtronic, Inc., 219 Md. App. 485, 101 A.3d 467 (2014) (unanimously reversing the trial court’s preemption/dismissal ruling and holding that injured patient’s claims arising out of medical device manufacturer’s off-label promotion of its medical device were not preempted by federal law and thus allowing plaintiff to proceed with his meritorious claims)
Cabana v. Stryker Biotech, LLC et al., Case No. BC465313, 2012 WL 3729227 (Cal.Super. Ct., August 20, 2012) (holding that injured patient’s state law claims arising out of medical device manufacturer’s off-label promotion of its bone morphogenetic protein [Infuse] were not expressly nor impliedly preempted by federal law)
Dorsett v. Sandoz, Inc., 699 F.Supp.2d 1142 (C.D.Cal. 2010) (denying defendants’ preemption motion and holding that both name-brand and generic drug manufacturers have an affirmative duty to issue warnings)
Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 701 F.Supp.2d 1040 (S.D.Ind.2010) (denying defendant’s learned intermediary defense and further allowing plaintiffs’ experts to testify regarding the causal association between antidepressants and increased suicidal behavior)
Mason v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.3d 387 (7th Cir. 2010) (unanimously reversing the trial court’s preemption ruling and allowing plaintiffs’ claims to proceed to a trial on the merits)
Forst v. Smithkline Beecham Corp., 639 F.Supp.2d 948 (E.D.Wis.,2009) (holding that plaintiffs’ claims are not preempted by federal law)
Forst v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 602 F.Supp.2d 960 (E.D.Wis. 2009) (holding that Wisconsin has not adopted the learned intermediary doctrine and allowing all of plaintiffs’ claims, including, negligence, fraud and punitive damages to proceed to the jury)
Cunningham v. SmithKline Beecham, 255 F.R.D. 474 (N.D.Ind. 2009) (ordering defendant to produce documents and awarding sanctions)
Knipe v. SmithKline Beecham, 583 F.Supp.2d 602 (E.D.Pa. 2008) (holding that a drug manufacturer owes a duty to warn regarding risks associated with off-label uses and allowing plaintiffs’ claims for compensatory and punitive damages to proceed to the jury)
Knipe v.SmithKline Beecham, 583 F.Supp.2d 553 (E.D.Pa 2008) (holding that plaintiffs’ claims are not preempted by federal law)
Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.Supp.2d 1225 (S.D.Ind. 2008) (granting plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration and holding that plaintiff’s claims are not preempted by federal law)
Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. Sherwood Partners, Inc. (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 802
Notable Media Appearances
TV
KABC News Los Angeles
KCAL News Los Angeles
KCBS News Los Angeles
KNBC News Los Angeles
KTTV Fox 11 News Los Angeles
Radio
KPCC 89.3 Southern California Public Radio
News
Andrews Litigation Reporters
Bloomberg News
BNA (Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.)
California Lawyer Magazine
Chicago Daily Law Bulletin
FDA News: Devices & Diagnostics Letter
Law 360
Law.com
Lawyers USA
Mass Device Blog
Mealey’s Emerging Drugs & Devices
Mealey’s Litigation Report: Antidepressant Report
MedPage Today
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
National Law Journal
Nature
Pennsylvania Law Weekly
Pharmagossip
Pharmalot
Philadelphia Inquirer
Pittsburgh Post Gazette
San Francisco Chronicle
Sciencedaily.com
The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Legal Intelligencer
The Legal Intelligencer
The Star Ledger
Toronto Star
TRIAL magazine
Westlaw Journals
Additional Languages
Farsi
German (conversational)
Bijan has had the privilege of participating in cases that have shaped and developed the law for the benefit of injured victims and consumers of pharmaceutical products. In one such case, the Court agreed with his arguments and, in an issue of first impression, held that drug manufacturers owe an affirmative duty to warn regarding risks associated with children’s off-label use. Bijan’s published cases have also exposed reprehensible corporate conduct. For example, a federal court in Pennsylvania noted that “internal documents suggest that Defendant acted with a wanton and willful disregard for the safety of its consumers,†and thus allowed Bijan’s clients to proceed with their punitive damages claims.
He has also been at the forefront of the preemption battle and has successfully argued against preemption (drug/device manufacturer immunity) in numerous cases. Most recently, in 2014, Bijan successfully briefed and argued the first and only medical device preemption case to be heard by Maryland Court of Special Appeals, wherein in an issue of first impression, the three judge panel unanimously agreed with Bijan’s arguments that plaintiff’s claims were not preempted and held that plaintiff could proceed with his claims against the medical device manufacturer. McCormick v. Medtronic, Inc., 219 Md. App.485, 101 A.3d 467, 474 (2014) (“We shall hold that federal law does not expressly or impliedly preempt the plaintiffs’ claims concerning misrepresentations or express warranties that the manufacturer may have made in voluntary communications with the public or with members of the medical profession.â€).
Similarly, Bijan successfully briefed and argued the first drug preemption case to ever be heard by the United States Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal in Chicago, Illinois. In the landmark decision, the three judge panel of the Seventh Circuit unanimously agreed with Bijan’s arguments and held that plaintiffs’ claims against the drug manufacturer were not preempted by federal law. Mason v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.3d. 387 (7th Cir. 2010). The significance of these landmark rulings is they ensure that drug and medical device companies who engage in deceptive or impermissible conduct are not entitled to immunity (preemption) and must be held accountable for monetary damages in a court of law for any injuries that they or their products cause to consumers.
In addition to the previously mentioned appellate decisions, Bijan has likewise successfully opposed preemption in numerous other state and federal trial courts, including Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.Supp.2d 1225 (S.D.Ind. 2008); Knipe v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 583 F.Supp.2d 553 (E.D.Pa 2008); Forst v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 639 F.Supp.2d 948 (E.D.Wis. 2009); Dorsett v. Sandoz, Inc., 699 F.Supp.2d 1142 (C.D.Cal. 2010); and Cabana v. Stryker Biotech LLC, 2012 WL 3876245 (Cal.Super.Ct., Aug. 20, 2012). Bijan also co-authored amicus briefs in support of the respondents in the Supreme Court’s landmark cases Wyeth v. Levine, 129 S.Ct. 1187 (2009) and Pliva v. Mensing, 131 S.Ct. 2567 (2011).
Bijan has written numerous articles, including “Complete Tort Immunity For Drug Manufacturers Is Bad For The Public Health,†published in Mealey’s™ Litigation Report, “Preemption’s Requiem in the Wake of Wyeth v. Levine,†Mealey’s™ Emerging Drugs & Devices and “Levine To Mensing — A Journey From The Sublime To The Ridiculous,†Mealey’s™ Emerging Drugs & Devices. Most recently, he co-wrote “Challenging Medical Ghostwriting in US Courts,†published in PLoS Medicine.
Practice Areas
Class Actions
Complex and Multi-District Litigation
Consumer Fraud Litigation
Defective Medical Devices
Personal Injury
Prescription Drugs
Pharmaceutical Drug Product Liability
Zantac Cancer Lawsuit
Product Liability Law
Whistleblower Protection
Wrongful Death Law
Education
University of California, Los Angeles (B.A., cum laude, 1999)
University of California School of Law, Los Angeles, California (J.D., 2002)
Court Admissions
California, 2002
U.S. District Court, Central District of California, 2002
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 2002
U.S. District Court, Southern District of California, 2005
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, 2005
U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, 2008
U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan, 2008
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, 2008
U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, 2008
U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 2009
U.S. Supreme Court, 2011
U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, 2012
U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit, 2013
Awards and Honors
The National Trial Lawyers Top 100 Trial Lawyers
Selected to: Southern California Super Lawyers®2017 2020
Selected to: Southern California Super Lawyers® Rising Stars, 2009 2016
Up-and-Coming 100: 2016 Southern California Rising Stars Top List
Avvo.com Superb Score 10 out of 10
Nation’s Top One Percent, National Association of Distinguished Counsel
Listed, The Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyersâ„¢
Member, UCLA School of Law Moot Court Honors Program
Member
State Bar of California
American Association for Justice: Leader’s Forum; Medtronic InFUSE® Litigation Group; Products Liability Section; Qui Tam Litigation Group; STEP-Toxic, Environmental and Pharmaceutical Torts Section
Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles
Member, UCLA Journal of International Law & Foreign Affairs
Contributing Author to The Docket, a UCLA School of Law Publication
Presentations/ Speeches
Program: Medtronic InFUSE Litigation GroupTopic: Status of Cases That Have Survived Preemption Motions and Discovery Strategies and Different Venue OptionsOrganization: American Association for JusticeEvent: 2014 AAJ Annual ConventionLocation: Baltimore, MarylandDate: July 26 30, 2014
Topic: “Status of the Infuse Litigationâ€Organization: Mass Torts Made PerfectEvent: Medtronic Infuse Litigation UpdateLocation: Las Vegas, NevadaDate: October 10, 2013
Topic: Panel: CorruptionOrganization: Selling SicknessEvent: Selling Sickness, People Before Profits, Session VILocation: Washington, D.C.Date: February 20 22, 2013
Topic: “Living with the Mensing Decisionâ€Organization: Mass Torts Made PerfectEvent: Actos and Pelvic Mesh Litigation UpdateLocation: Philadelphia, PennsylvaniaDate: February 8, 2012
Topic: “Legal Implications of Pharmaceutical Ghostwritingâ€Organization: Faculty of Law’s ConferenceEvent: The Ethics of Ghost Authorship in Biomedical Research: Concerns and Remedies WorkshopLocation: University of TorontoDate: May 4, 2011
Topic: “Oral Advocacy Competition Participantâ€Organization: American Bar AssociationEvent: ABA Forum on Communications Law Media Advocacy WorkshopLocation: Key Largo, FloridaDate: February 8, 2007
Topic: “Strategies for Litigating Copyright Cases When Infringement is Uncontestedâ€Organization: San Fernando Valley Bar AssociationEvent: Intellectual Property, Entertainment Law & Internet Law SectionLocation: Woodland Hills, CaliforniaDate: February 17, 2006
Author
Challenging Medical Ghostwriting in US Courts PLOS Medicine, January 24, 2012
Reason Magazine Perpetuates False Information About Safety and Efficacy of Antidepressants, September 30, 2011
Levine To Mensing — A Journey From The Sublime To The Ridiculous LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Emerging Drugs & Devices, Volume 16, Issue #16, August 18, 2011
Outsmarting the ‘Learned-Intermediary Doctrine’ Defense The Advocate, February 2010, pg 62
Preemption’s Requiem in the Wake of Wyeth v. Levine LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Emerging Drugs & Devices, Volume 14, Issue #10, May, 2009
Complete Tort Immunity For Drug Manufacturers Is Bad For The Public Health: A Commentary On Colacicco v. Apotex And Other Recent Preemption Decisions LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Litigation Report: Antidepressant Report, Volume 4, Issue #10, May, 2008
Caught Without a License Marketing Management Marketing Law, November/December, 2007
YouTube Sued: It’s a Riot American Bar Association, Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section (TIPS) Media Privacy Committee Newsletter, Fall, 2006
Camisoles: Providing Thin Protection, IP Law 360, September 28, 2006
Grokster: Inducing Further Litigation ABA Tort Trial & Practice Section, Intellectual Property Law Committee Newsletter, Fall, 2005
Pro Bono and Civic Activities
Member, Representative Assembly of the Palms Neighborhood Council
Public Counsel Volunteer Attorney, 2007
Published Cases
Hricik v. Stryker Biotech, LLC, 89 F. Supp. 3d 694 (E.D. Pa. 2015) (granting plaintiff’s motion to remand the case back to state court)
Boutte v. Stryker Biotech, LLC, 67 F. Supp. 3d 732, 734 (M.D. La. 2014) (denying defendant’s motion to dismiss and permitting plaintiff to proceed with his products liability claims against medical device manufacturer)
McCormick v. Medtronic, Inc., 219 Md. App. 485, 101 A.3d 467 (2014) (unanimously reversing the trial court’s preemption/dismissal ruling and holding that injured patient’s claims arising out of medical device manufacturer’s off-label promotion of its medical device were not preempted by federal law and thus allowing plaintiff to proceed with his meritorious claims)
Cabana v. Stryker Biotech, LLC et al., Case No. BC465313, 2012 WL 3729227 (Cal.Super. Ct., August 20, 2012) (holding that injured patient’s state law claims arising out of medical device manufacturer’s off-label promotion of its bone morphogenetic protein [Infuse] were not expressly nor impliedly preempted by federal law)
Dorsett v. Sandoz, Inc., 699 F.Supp.2d 1142 (C.D.Cal. 2010) (denying defendants’ preemption motion and holding that both name-brand and generic drug manufacturers have an affirmative duty to issue warnings)
Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 701 F.Supp.2d 1040 (S.D.Ind.2010) (denying defendant’s learned intermediary defense and further allowing plaintiffs’ experts to testify regarding the causal association between antidepressants and increased suicidal behavior)
Mason v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.3d 387 (7th Cir. 2010) (unanimously reversing the trial court’s preemption ruling and allowing plaintiffs’ claims to proceed to a trial on the merits)
Forst v. Smithkline Beecham Corp., 639 F.Supp.2d 948 (E.D.Wis.,2009) (holding that plaintiffs’ claims are not preempted by federal law)
Forst v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 602 F.Supp.2d 960 (E.D.Wis. 2009) (holding that Wisconsin has not adopted the learned intermediary doctrine and allowing all of plaintiffs’ claims, including, negligence, fraud and punitive damages to proceed to the jury)
Cunningham v. SmithKline Beecham, 255 F.R.D. 474 (N.D.Ind. 2009) (ordering defendant to produce documents and awarding sanctions)
Knipe v. SmithKline Beecham, 583 F.Supp.2d 602 (E.D.Pa. 2008) (holding that a drug manufacturer owes a duty to warn regarding risks associated with off-label uses and allowing plaintiffs’ claims for compensatory and punitive damages to proceed to the jury)
Knipe v.SmithKline Beecham, 583 F.Supp.2d 553 (E.D.Pa 2008) (holding that plaintiffs’ claims are not preempted by federal law)
Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.Supp.2d 1225 (S.D.Ind. 2008) (granting plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration and holding that plaintiff’s claims are not preempted by federal law)
Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. Sherwood Partners, Inc. (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 802
Notable Media Appearances
TV
KABC News Los Angeles
KCAL News Los Angeles
KCBS News Los Angeles
KNBC News Los Angeles
KTTV Fox 11 News Los Angeles
Radio
KPCC 89.3 Southern California Public Radio
News
Andrews Litigation Reporters
Bloomberg News
BNA (Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.)
California Lawyer Magazine
Chicago Daily Law Bulletin
FDA News: Devices & Diagnostics Letter
Law 360
Law.com
Lawyers USA
Mass Device Blog
Mealey’s Emerging Drugs & Devices
Mealey’s Litigation Report: Antidepressant Report
MedPage Today
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
National Law Journal
Nature
Pennsylvania Law Weekly
Pharmagossip
Pharmalot
Philadelphia Inquirer
Pittsburgh Post Gazette
San Francisco Chronicle
Sciencedaily.com
The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Legal Intelligencer
The Legal Intelligencer
The Star Ledger
Toronto Star
TRIAL magazine
Westlaw Journals
Additional Languages
Farsi
German (conversational)