Bijan Esfandiari

Wisner Baum
11111 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 1750, Los Angeles, CA 90025

(310) 694-5913 (Phone), (310) 207-3233 (Phone), (310) 820-7444 (Fax)

Wrongful Death
Catastrophic Injury
Drug and Medical Device Litigation
Class Actions
Complex and Multi-District Litigation
Mass Torts
Consumer Fraud
Product Liability

State Bar of California Los Angeles County Bar Association American Association for Justice: Leader’s Forum; Medtronic InFUSE® 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

917053434

2002

University of California, Los Angeles, B.A., cum laude, 1999

University of California, Los Angeles, J.D., 2002

<em>Hricik v. Stryker Biotech, LLC</em>, 89 F. Supp. 3d 694 (E.D. Pa. 2015) (granting plaintiff’s motion to remand the case back to state court) <em>Boutte v. Stryker Biotech</em>, LLC, 67 F. Supp. 3d 732, 734 (M.D. La. 2014) (denying defendant’s motion to dismiss and permitting plaintiff to proceed with his products liability claims against medical device manufacturer) <em>McCormick v. Medtronic, Inc</em>., 219 Md. App. 485, 101 A.3d 467 (2014) (unanimously reversing the trial court’s preemption/dismissal ruling and holding that injured patient’s claims arising out of medical device manufacturer’s off-label promotion of its medical device were not preempted by federal law and thus allowing plaintiff to proceed with his meritorious claims) <em>Cabana v. Stryker Biotech, LLC et al., Case No. BC465313, 2012 WL 3729227</em> (Cal.Super. Ct., August 20, 2012) (holding that injured patient’s state law claims arising out of medical device manufacturer’s off-label promotion of its bone morphogenetic protein [Infuse] were not expressly nor impliedly preempted by federal law) <em>Dorsett v. Sandoz, Inc.</em>, 699 F.Supp.2d 1142 (C.D.Cal. 2010) (denying defendants’ preemption motion and holding that both name-brand and generic drug manufacturers have an affirmative duty to issue warnings) <em>Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp</em>., 701 F.Supp.2d 1040 (S.D.Ind.2010) (denying defendant’s learned intermediary defense and further allowing plaintiffs’ experts to testify regarding the causal association between antidepressants and increased suicidal behavior) <em>Mason v. SmithKline Beecham Corp</em>., 596 F.3d 387 (7th Cir. 2010) (unanimously reversing the trial court’s preemption ruling and allowing plaintiffs’ claims to proceed to a trial on the merits) <em>Forst v. Smithkline Beecham Corp</em>., 639 F.Supp.2d 948 (E.D.Wis.,2009) (holding that plaintiffs’ claims are not preempted by federal law) <em><em>Forst v. SmithKline Beecham Corp</em></em>., 602 F.Supp.2d 960 (E.D.Wis. 2009) (holding that Wisconsin has not adopted the learned intermediary doctrine and allowing all of plaintiffs’ claims, including, negligence, fraud and punitive damages to proceed to the jury) <em><em>Cunningham v. SmithKline Beecham</em></em>, 255 F.R.D. 474 (N.D.Ind. 2009) (ordering defendant to produce documents and awarding sanctions) <em>Knipe v. SmithKline Beecham</em>, 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 plaintiffs’ claims for compensatory and punitive damages to proceed to the jury) <em class="Ltext">Knipe v.SmithKline Beecham</em>, 583 F.Supp.2d 553 (E.D.Pa 2008) (holding that plaintiffs’ claims are not preempted by federal law) <em class="Ltext"><em>Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp</em></em>., 596 F.Supp.2d 1225 (S.D.Ind. 2008) (granting plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration and holding that plaintiff’s claims are not preempted by federal law) <em>Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. Sherwood Partners, Inc.</em> (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 802

Wisner Baum
11111 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 1750, Los Angeles, CA 90025

(310) 694-5913 (Phone), (310) 207-3233 (Phone), (310) 820-7444 (Fax)

Wrongful Death
Catastrophic Injury
Drug and Medical Device Litigation
Class Actions
Complex and Multi-District Litigation
Mass Torts
Consumer Fraud
Product Liability

State Bar of California Los Angeles County Bar Association American Association for Justice: Leader’s Forum; Medtronic InFUSE® 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

917053434

2002

University of California, Los Angeles, B.A., cum laude, 1999

University of California, Los Angeles, J.D., 2002

<em>Hricik v. Stryker Biotech, LLC</em>, 89 F. Supp. 3d 694 (E.D. Pa. 2015) (granting plaintiff’s motion to remand the case back to state court) <em>Boutte v. Stryker Biotech</em>, LLC, 67 F. Supp. 3d 732, 734 (M.D. La. 2014) (denying defendant’s motion to dismiss and permitting plaintiff to proceed with his products liability claims against medical device manufacturer) <em>McCormick v. Medtronic, Inc</em>., 219 Md. App. 485, 101 A.3d 467 (2014) (unanimously reversing the trial court’s preemption/dismissal ruling and holding that injured patient’s claims arising out of medical device manufacturer’s off-label promotion of its medical device were not preempted by federal law and thus allowing plaintiff to proceed with his meritorious claims) <em>Cabana v. Stryker Biotech, LLC et al., Case No. BC465313, 2012 WL 3729227</em> (Cal.Super. Ct., August 20, 2012) (holding that injured patient’s state law claims arising out of medical device manufacturer’s off-label promotion of its bone morphogenetic protein [Infuse] were not expressly nor impliedly preempted by federal law) <em>Dorsett v. Sandoz, Inc.</em>, 699 F.Supp.2d 1142 (C.D.Cal. 2010) (denying defendants’ preemption motion and holding that both name-brand and generic drug manufacturers have an affirmative duty to issue warnings) <em>Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp</em>., 701 F.Supp.2d 1040 (S.D.Ind.2010) (denying defendant’s learned intermediary defense and further allowing plaintiffs’ experts to testify regarding the causal association between antidepressants and increased suicidal behavior) <em>Mason v. SmithKline Beecham Corp</em>., 596 F.3d 387 (7th Cir. 2010) (unanimously reversing the trial court’s preemption ruling and allowing plaintiffs’ claims to proceed to a trial on the merits) <em>Forst v. Smithkline Beecham Corp</em>., 639 F.Supp.2d 948 (E.D.Wis.,2009) (holding that plaintiffs’ claims are not preempted by federal law) <em><em>Forst v. SmithKline Beecham Corp</em></em>., 602 F.Supp.2d 960 (E.D.Wis. 2009) (holding that Wisconsin has not adopted the learned intermediary doctrine and allowing all of plaintiffs’ claims, including, negligence, fraud and punitive damages to proceed to the jury) <em><em>Cunningham v. SmithKline Beecham</em></em>, 255 F.R.D. 474 (N.D.Ind. 2009) (ordering defendant to produce documents and awarding sanctions) <em>Knipe v. SmithKline Beecham</em>, 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 plaintiffs’ claims for compensatory and punitive damages to proceed to the jury) <em class="Ltext">Knipe v.SmithKline Beecham</em>, 583 F.Supp.2d 553 (E.D.Pa 2008) (holding that plaintiffs’ claims are not preempted by federal law) <em class="Ltext"><em>Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp</em></em>., 596 F.Supp.2d 1225 (S.D.Ind. 2008) (granting plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration and holding that plaintiff’s claims are not preempted by federal law) <em>Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. Sherwood Partners, Inc.</em> (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 802

Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman PC
1500 Market Street 12Th Floor East Tower, Philadelphia, PA 19102
(215) 665-5659
Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman PC
1250 24Th Street, Nw Suite 300, Washington, DC 20037
(800) 827-0097
Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, PC
113 S. Monroe Street 1St Floor, Tallahassee, FL 32301
(850) 201-7158 (Office), (850) 201-7101 (Fax)
Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, pC
201 St. Charles Avenue Suite 2500, New Orleans, LA 70170
(504) 754-6977 (Office), (504) 524-7979 (Fax)
Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, PC
12100 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 950, Los Angeles, CA 90025
(310) 207-3233

California - Active 2002

Associate at Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold LLP - 2002-2007

University of California at Los Angeles School of Law
Degree - JD - Juris Doctor - Law
Graduated - 2002
University of California - Los Angeles
Degree - BA - Bachelor of Arts, cum laude
Graduated - 1999

Wrongful Death - 20%
Litigation - 20%
Personal Injury - 20%
Class Action - 20%
Defective / Dangerous Products - 20%

Farsi

U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, 2013-present
U.S. Supreme Court, 2011-present
Taxpayers Against Fraud Education Fund - Member, 2010-present
Admission to the US Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 2009-present
Admission to U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, 2008-present
Admission to U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, 2008-present
Admission to U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan, 2008-present
Admission to the U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, 2008-present
The American Association of Justice-Products Liability Section, STEP-Toxic, Environmental and Pharmaceutical Torts Section - Member, 2008-present
Admission to U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, 2005-present
Admission to U.S. District Court, Southern District of California, 2005-present
American Bar Association - Member, 2003-present
Admission to California, 2002-present
Admission to U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 2002-present
Admission to U.S. District Court, Central District of California, 2002-present
State Bar of California - Member, 2002-present
UCLA School of Law Moot Court Honors Program - Member, 2000-2001
UCLA Journal of International Law & Foreign Affairs - Member, 1999-2000

Bijan Esfandiari is a pharmaceutical product liability litigation attorney and shareholder at Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman in Los Angeles. He has...

Wrongful Death
Catastrophic Injury
Drug and Medical Device Litigation
Class Actions
Complex and Multi-District Litigation
Mass Torts
Consumer Fraud
Product Liability

917053434

2002

University of California, Los Angeles, B.A., 1999

University of California, Los Angeles, J.D., 2002

Wrongful Death
Catastrophic Injury
Drug and Medical Device Litigation
Class Actions
Complex and Multi-District Litigation
Mass Torts
Consumer Fraud
Product Liability

917053434

2002

University of California, Los Angeles, B.A., 1999

University of California, Los Angeles, J.D., 2002

Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, P.C.
12100 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 950, Los Angeles, CA 90025

(310) 207-3233 (Phone), (310) 820-7444 (Fax)

Wrongful Death
Catastrophic Injury
Drug and Medical Device Litigation
Class Actions
Complex and Multi-District Litigation
Mass Torts

State Bar of California
The American Association for Justice (Member, Sections on: Products Liability
STEP-Toxic, Environmental and Pharmaceutical Torts)
Consumer Attorneys of Los Angeles
Los Angeles County Bar Association.

917053434

2002, California, U.S. District Court, Central District of California and U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
2006, U.S. District Court, Eastern and Southern Districts of California
2008, U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third and Tenth Circuits
2009, U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
2011, U.S. Supreme Court
2012, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
2013, U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit

University of California, Los Angeles, B.A., cum laude, 1999

University of California, Los Angeles, J.D., 2002

Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. Sherwood Partners, Inc., 131 Cal.App.4th 802 (2005); Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.Supp.2d 1225 (S.D.Ind. 2008); Knipe v. SmithKline Beecham, 583 F.Supp.2d 553 (E.D.Pa. 2008); Knipe v. SmithKline Beecham, 583 F.Supp.2d 602 (E.D.Pa. 2008); Cunningham v. SmithKline Beecham, 255 F.R.D. 474 (N.D.Ind. 2009); Forst v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 602 F.Supp.2d 960 (E.D.Wis. 2009); Forst v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 639 F.Supp.2d 948 (E.D.Wis. 2009); Mason v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.3d 387 (7th Cir. 2010); Tucker v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 701 F.Supp.2d 1040 (S.D.Ind. 2010); Dorsett v. Sandoz, Inc., 699 F.Supp.2d 1142 (C.D.Cal. 2010).

Farsi

Bijan Esfandiari is a pharmaceutical product liability litigation attorney and shareholder at Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman in Los Angeles. He has successfully represented clients in state and fede...