The appellants appealed the dismissal of their motion to certify a class proceeding involving product liability claims against the manufacturers of an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter.
The Divisional Court upheld the motion judge's finding that the pleadings failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action for defective design because they did not identify a specific alternative design.
However, the court allowed the appeal in part, finding that regulatory advisories provided 'some basis in fact' to certify the common issue of whether the defendants breached their duty to warn learned intermediaries of the risks associated with the filters.
