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 childrenâ€™s off-label use. Bijanâ€™s published cases have also exposed reprehensible corporate conduct. For example, a federal court in Pennsylvania noted that â€œinternal documents suggest that Defendant acted with a wanton and willful disregard for the safety of its consumers,â€ and thus allowed Bijanâ€™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 Bijanâ€™s arguments that plaintiffâ€™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) (â€œWe shall hold that federal law does not expressly or impliedly preempt the plaintiffsâ€™ 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 Bijanâ€™s arguments and held that plaintiffsâ€™ 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 Courtâ€™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 â€œComplete Tort Immunity For Drug Manufacturers Is Bad For The Public Health,â€ published in Mealeyâ€™sâ„¢ Litigation Report, â€œPreemptionâ€™s Requiem in the Wake of Wyeth v. Levine,â€ Mealeyâ€™sâ„¢ Emerging Drugs & Devices and â€œLevine To Mensing â€” A Journey From The Sublime To The Ridiculous,â€ Mealeyâ€™sâ„¢ Emerging Drugs & Devices. Most recently, he co-wrote â€œChallenging Medical Ghostwriting in US Courts,â€ 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 LawyersÂ®2017 2020 Selected to: Southern California Super LawyersÂ® Rising Stars, 2009 2016 Up-and-Coming 100: 2016 Southern California Rising Stars Top List Avvo.com Superb Score 10 out of 10 Nationâ€™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: Leaderâ€™s Forum; Medtronic InFUSEÂ® 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: â€œStatus 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: â€œLiving with the Mensing Decisionâ€Organization: Mass Torts Made PerfectEvent: Actos and Pelvic Mesh Litigation UpdateLocation: Philadelphia, PennsylvaniaDate: February 8, 2012 Topic: â€œLegal Implications of Pharmaceutical Ghostwritingâ€Organization: Faculty of Lawâ€™s ConferenceEvent: The Ethics of Ghost Authorship in Biomedical Research: Concerns and Remedies WorkshopLocation: University of TorontoDate: May 4, 2011 Topic: â€œOral Advocacy Competition Participantâ€Organization: American Bar AssociationEvent: ABA Forum on Communications Law Media Advocacy WorkshopLocation: Key Largo, FloridaDate: February 8, 2007 Topic: â€œStrategies 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 â€” A Journey From The Sublime To The Ridiculous LexisNexisÂ® Mealeyâ€™sâ„¢ Emerging Drugs & Devices, Volume 16, Issue #16, August 18, 2011 Outsmarting the â€˜Learned-Intermediary Doctrineâ€™ Defense The Advocate, February 2010, pg 62 Preemptionâ€™s Requiem in the Wake of Wyeth v. Levine LexisNexisÂ® Mealeyâ€™sâ„¢ 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 LexisNexisÂ® Mealeyâ€™sâ„¢ Litigation Report: Antidepressant Report, Volume 4, Issue #10, May, 2008 Caught Without a License Marketing Management Marketing Law, November/December, 2007 YouTube Sued: Itâ€™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 plaintiffâ€™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 defendantâ€™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 courtâ€™s preemption/dismissal ruling and holding that injured patientâ€™s claims arising out of medical device manufacturerâ€™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 patientâ€™s state law claims arising out of medical device manufacturerâ€™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 defendantsâ€™ 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 defendantâ€™s learned intermediary defense and further allowing plaintiffsâ€™ 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 courtâ€™s preemption ruling and allowing plaintiffsâ€™ 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 plaintiffsâ€™ 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 plaintiffsâ€™ 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 plaintiffsâ€™ 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 plaintiffsâ€™ claims are not preempted by federal law) Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.Supp.2d 1225 (S.D.Ind. 2008) (granting plaintiffâ€™s motion for reconsideration and holding that plaintiffâ€™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 Mealeyâ€™s Emerging Drugs & Devices Mealeyâ€™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)