Olympus Duodenoscope Lawsuit Lawsuit in California

Preparing your case review…
Written By
People's Justice Legal Research Team

Statute of Limitations

California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1 provides a 2-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims including medical device product liability. The discovery rule applies — the clock starts when the plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered the infection and its connection to the contaminated duodenoscope. California has no statute of repose for product liability claims.

2 years from discovery of duodenoscope-linked infection

Filing Venue

Where to File in California

California duodenoscope cases have been filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court and the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The UCLA outbreak cases established key legal precedents for duodenoscope design defect claims. California applies the consumer expectations and risk-utility tests for design defect under Barker v. Lull Engineering. The state's Kelly/Frye standard for expert testimony is generally more permissive than the federal Daubert standard. California's plaintiff-friendly discovery rule and absence of a product liability statute of repose make it a highly favorable venue for infection claims, including those arising from the October 2025 field safety notice disclosures.

California Data

Exposure in California

Source: UCLA Health System / LA County Department of Public Health

Source: UCLA Health System disclosure

Source: Court records — Los Angeles County Superior Court

Back to Olympus Duodenoscope Lawsuit Lawsuit Overview