A judge did not allow the Supreme Court June 2017 Bristol-Meyer Plavix ruling influence his decision and allowed the out-of-town plaintiffs from proceeding in state court vaginal mesh and talc powder lawsuits. In June 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that lawsuits could not be pursued against the maker of the blood thinner Plavix in states where the plaintiff did not purchase or consume the product unless the company is incorporated or headquartered there.
This ruling affected the fate of many lawsuits which were filed out-of-state. However, a Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge only agreed to dismiss one out-of-state plaintiff’s case out of more than 100 transvaginal mesh claims pending against Johnson & Johnson's Ethicon subsidiary in the state court’s mass tort program. This was based on the finding that the company that manufactured the actual mesh implanted in the out-of-state plaintiffs had sufficient ties to Pennsylvania.
A Missouri judge too upheld a $110 million talcum powder cancer verdict awarded to an out-of-state resident, finding the defendants in the case engaged in sufficient acts during the manufacturing, labelling, and sale of Johnson's Baby Powder and Shower-to-Shower products in Missouri to establish the jurisdiction in the state court system.