Plaintiffs Back Accolade Hip Replacement Claims; Say Rule (b)(6) Test ‘Has Evolved’

SAN FRANCISCO –– A plaintiff asserting claims related to Stryker’s Accolade Hip Replacement have backed their complaint by asserting that their causes of action are “well beyond speculation.”

In an opposition brief filed July 21 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the plaintiffs further argued that the case “demands significant discovery and disclosures.”

Plaintiff James Bem asserted the claims, contending that he was implanted with Stryker’s Accolade hip replacement system and that the device has caused him pain and should be removed. Bem filed the action in the California Superior Court for Alameda County. Once …