The website Law360 has an interesting update on the suggested class action lawsuit against the San Diego stem cell center Stemgenex. Note that it seems you can read the full Law360 write-up without a subscription if you open the site in Chrome otherwise you web browser. See more background on Stemgenex and on this particular case here .
Unsurprisingly, the plaintiffs and defense see this case within opposite ways as reflected in quotes in the Law360 article:
“ Plaintiffs make non-specific and conclusory allegations with respect to all named defendants, ” StemGenex said. “ The second amended complaint is so without any specific facts to support its contentions that it is difficult for defendants to reasonably prepare a defense. ”
Brian Findley of Mulligan Banham & Findley, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, told Law360 Wednesday that the accusations are “ quite specific” and cite false stats, made-up online reviews and StemGenex employees. If clients told the company that the treatment hadn’ t done everything, they were told it could take months to see an effect, or even that they should buy another treatment, he said. ”
A key issue in this case is the marketing associated with stem cell offerings from Stemgenex and the plaintiffs state this marketing was problematic:
“ The three StemGenex customers, Selena Moorer, Stephen Ginsberg plus Alexandra Gardner, all say that they paid the company $14, 900 for each stem cell treatments for lupus, diabetes and other ailments after being persuaded by the number of happy customers on the company’ s website, but that the remedies had no effect. ”
The particular Stemgenex website still lists an apparent 100% individual satisfaction marketing claim as of today, January 23, 2017 (see screenshot below).
Based on the Law360 article, Stemgenex has made various arguments to support their own motion for dismissal and they overall called the lawsuit the “ fishing expedition. ”
If you want to the actual case, here is some info:
“ The situation is Moorer v. StemGenex Medical Group Inc., ou al., case number 3: 16-cv-02816, in the U. T. District Court for the Southern District of California. ”
It seems likely that more patient matches against stem cell clinics will emerge this year. A few, but not all of the other recent cases of this kind including against US Stem Cellular, Inc. and its subsidiary US Stem Cell Clinic are already settled before any judgment was issued. I’ meters not sure of the status of a different proposed potential course action case against The Lung Institute. If you know of other these lawsuits please contact me or post a comment.