Spotlight Justice is proud to announce that attorney Dena Young has been appointed to the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee in MDL No. 3181, the federal multidistrict litigation involving certain Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulators.
U.S. District Judge Josephine L. Staton appointed Dena to the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee, or PSC, in an August 13, 2026 order establishing the plaintiffs’ leadership structure for the multidistrict litigation.
Dena is one of six attorneys appointed to the PSC. Other members of the impressive leadership team include the four members of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee, Plaintiffs’ Liaison Counsel and the three Co-Lead counsel.
The appointment places her among the attorneys contributing to coordinated pretrial work in cases involving certain Boston Scientific pain-management devices.
What Is the Boston Scientific Device Litigation About?
Spinal cord stimulation is one approach used by doctors to manage certain chronic pain conditions. The treatment involves implanting a system that uses electrical stimulation near the spinal cord, with the goal of changing the way pain is experienced.
The cases in MDL 3181 involve implanted stimulators manufactured by Boston Scientific. Although the device promises pain relief, thousands of patients have little to no pain relief and instead experience burns, shocks, organ dysfunction and other serious permanent injuries.
A federal transfer order issued on June 5, 2026 moved certain cases involving these devices to the Central District of California for coordinated pretrial proceedings before Judge Staton. The cases are now being coordinated in MDL No. 3181 before Judge Staton.
What Does It Mean When Cases Are Part of an MDL?
When federal cases in different courts raise overlapping factual issues, federal law allows them to be transferred to one district so shared pretrial matters can be handled together.
That process is commonly known as multidistrict litigation, or an MDL.
Centralizing cases does not mean every plaintiff has the same claim or the same experience. A person’s medical history, treatment, alleged injuries, causation, and damages still need to be evaluated based on the facts of that individual case.
What the MDL changes is how shared pretrial issues are handled. Rather than addressing the same factual or technical questions separately in courts around the country, the parties and the court can work through common evidence and pretrial disputes in one coordinated proceeding.
In medical-device cases, that shared work can involve records about the product, scientific and technical evidence, company witnesses, regulatory materials, and other information that may be relevant across multiple cases.
What Does a Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee Do?
A Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee, or PSC, is part of the court-appointed leadership structure used to coordinate plaintiffs’ pretrial work in an MDL.
Judge Staton’s leadership order provides that the Boston Scientific PSC will support Co-Lead Counsel and the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee in coordinating and managing plaintiffs’ pretrial activities. Among its responsibilities, PSC members participate in work assigned and performed under the direction of the Co-Leads and Executive Committee, serve on committees established by Co-Lead Counsel, and carry out other work necessary to fulfill the PSC’s responsibilities.
That work can involve issues shared across many cases in the MDL rather than matters specific to a single plaintiff’s case. The court’s order also specifies that these leadership appointments are personal to the attorneys selected, rather than appointments of their respective law firms.
Dena Young’s Experience in Complex Mass Tort Litigation
Before founding Spotlight Justice, Dena spent years handling complex cases involving catastrophic injuries, dangerous products, toxic exposures, and other claims involving substantial medical and scientific evidence.
Throughout her career, Dena held court-appointed leadership roles in major national litigations including the Allergan Biocell Breast Implant Litigation, the Philips CPAP litigation, and the East Palestine Train Derailment case. She has also been appointed by her peers to serve on leadership committees for various important litigations including In re: Abbott Pharmaceuticals, et al, Preterm Infant Formula Litigation, In re: Xarelto Products Liability Litigation and In re: Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Litigation.
Her practice at Spotlight Justice continues to focus on serious and complex matters in which understanding a client’s individual experience is just as important as addressing the broader medical, technical, or corporate evidence.
That perspective matters in mass tort litigation because the work may be coordinated nationally while each client’s circumstances remain distinct. What happened medically, how treatment unfolded, and how an injury affected someone’s life can differ significantly from one person to the next.
At Spotlight Justice, those individual details remain central to how we approach the cases we handle.
How the PSC Appointment Fits Spotlight Justice’s Approach
At Spotlight Justice, national litigation work is paired with a deliberately focused caseload and direct attorney involvement. As a Philadelphia product liability lawyer, Dena continues to handle serious matters involving medical devices, dangerous products, catastrophic injuries, and mass torts.
We believe clients should understand what is happening in their case, what the evidence shows, and why each stage of the process matters.
Dena will serve on the Boston Scientific PSC alongside attorneys from firms across the country as the litigation moves through coordinated pretrial proceedings.
Questions About an Injury Involving a Medical Device?
When problems with an implanted medical device lead to additional treatment, another procedure, hospitalization, or continuing symptoms, it is reasonable to want to understand what happened and why.
A complication alone does not establish that a medical device was defective or that a manufacturer is legally responsible. Understanding what happened often requires reviewing the specific device, your medical history, the implant and later treatment, product information, medical records, and other evidence surrounding the injury.
Spotlight Justice represents individuals and families in complex product liability and mass tort matters involving serious injuries. We investigate what happened, examine the available evidence, and help clients understand the legal questions that can arise when they believe a product or medical device contributed to a serious and unexpected injury.
If you or someone you love has suffered a serious injury involving a medical device, contact Spotlight Justice to tell us what happened and discuss the legal options that may apply to your situation.
Disclaimer: The articles on this blog are for informational purposes only and are no substitute for legal advice or an attorney-client relationship. If you are seeking legal advice, please contact Spotlight Justice, PLLC directly.