<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Legal Sleuth® ** Case Watch℠ - birth defects Archives &#8212; Gooch Law Firm</title>
	<atom:link href="https://legalsleuth.com/tag/birth-defects/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://legalsleuth.com/tag/birth-defects/</link>
	<description>The Source for All Things Legal ℠ - Information, Resources and Services</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2020 04:26:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	

 
	<item>
		<title>Paxil, Birth Defect, Glaxo &#038; Collier</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/paxil-birth-defect-glaxo-collier/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2016 20:55:10 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prescription Drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[glaxo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missouri]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paxil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[virginia]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=7747</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Paxil, Birth Defect, Glaxo &#38; Collier: A recent case in the United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division ruled on a motion to dismiss et al. The Paxil, Birth Defect, Glaxo &#38; Collier case is about a Missouri mother that took Paxil during her pregnancy and gave birth to a child with a birth defect. A brief summary [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/paxil-birth-defect-glaxo-collier/">Paxil, Birth Defect, Glaxo &#038; Collier</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Topamax, Cleft Lip, Janssen &#038; Czimmer</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/topamax-cleft-lip-janssen-czimmer/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2016 15:30:17 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Watch℠]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prescription Drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cleft lip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cleft palate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[janssen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[topamax]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=7733</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Topamax, Cleft Lip, Janssen &#38; Czimmer: A recent case in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania ruled on an appeal related to trial court&#8217;s judgment. The Topamax, Cleft Lip, Janssen &#38; Czimmer case is about a Pennsylvania mother that took Topamax for migraine headaches (e.g. other reasons &#8211; migraine headache, anti-epilepsy drug), during her pregnancy and gave [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/topamax-cleft-lip-janssen-czimmer/">Topamax, Cleft Lip, Janssen &#038; Czimmer</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gurley, Janssen, Topamax &#038; Birth Defects</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/gurley-janssen-topamax-birth-defects/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2015 16:30:07 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Watch℠]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cleft lip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cleft palate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[epileptic episode]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[janssen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lexapro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[myoclonic seizures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[topamax]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=7179</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Gurley, Janssen, Topamax &#38; Birth Defects: A recent case in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania ruled on an appeal related to federal preemption and awards. The Gurley, Janssen, Topamax &#38; Birth Defects case documents what the children of many women that took Topamax for a health concern (e.g. migraine headache, anti-epilepsy drug), during pregnancy may face [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/gurley-janssen-topamax-birth-defects/">Gurley, Janssen, Topamax &#038; Birth Defects</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>MN, Smithkline Beechman, Paxil &#038; Birth Defects</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/mn-smithkline-beechman-paxil-birth-defects/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Mar 2015 18:46:16 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Watch℠]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ASD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atrial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paxil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[septal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smithkline beechman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[south dakota]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VSD]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=7075</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>MN, Smithkline Beechman, Paxil &#38; Birth Defects: A recent case in the United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Northern Division recently ruled on a motion to remand. MN, Smithkline Beechman, Paxil &#38; Birth Defects case documents what many paxil prescription drug users may be experiencing today – potential birth defects (e.g., atrial &#38; septal heart [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/mn-smithkline-beechman-paxil-birth-defects/">MN, Smithkline Beechman, Paxil &#038; Birth Defects</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rheinfrank, Abbott, Depakote &#038; Birth Defect</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/rheinfrank-abbott-depakote-birth-defect/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2015 18:53:28 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Watch℠]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abbott]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anti-epilepsy drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anti-seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[depakote]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fetal valproate syndrome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[migraine headache]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ohio]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=6703</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Rheinfrank, Abbott, Depakote &#38; Birth Defect:  A recent case in the United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division ruled on motion to dismiss claims. The Rheinfrank, Abbott, Depakote &#38; Birth Defect case documents what the children of many women that took Depakote for a health concern (e.g. migraine headache, anti-epilepsy drug), during pregnancy may face today &#8211; a potential [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/rheinfrank-abbott-depakote-birth-defect/">Rheinfrank, Abbott, Depakote &#038; Birth Defect</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hitt, Abbott, Depakote &#038; Birth Defect</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/hitt-abbott-depakote-birth-defect/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2015 18:18:55 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Watch℠]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abbott]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anti-epilepsy drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[depakote]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illinois]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[migraine headache]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spina bifida]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spinal cord defect]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=6692</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Hitt, Abbott, Depakote &#38; Birth Defect: A recent case from the past couple of years in the United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division ruled on a request for remand. The Hitt, Abbott, Depakote &#38; Birth Defect case documents what the children of many women that took Depakote for a health concern (e.g. migraine headache, anti-epilepsy [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/hitt-abbott-depakote-birth-defect/">Hitt, Abbott, Depakote &#038; Birth Defect</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Benjamin, Abbott, Depakote &#038; Birth Defect</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/benjamin-abbott-depakote-birth-defect/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2015 17:24:04 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Watch℠]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abbott]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anti-epilepsy drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cognitive injuries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[depakote]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illinois]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spina bifida]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spinal cord defect]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=6688</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Benjamin, Abbott, Depakote &#38; Birth Defect:  A recent case from the past couple of years in the United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division ruled on a request for remand. The Benjamin, Abbott, Depakote &#38; Birth Defect case documents what the children of many women that took Depakote for a health concern (e.g. migraine headache, anti-epilepsy [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/benjamin-abbott-depakote-birth-defect/">Benjamin, Abbott, Depakote &#038; Birth Defect</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lejune, Abbott, Depakote &#038; Birth Defect</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/lejune-abbott-depakote-birth-defect/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2015 16:25:31 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Watch℠]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abbott]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anti-epilepsy drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cognitive injuries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[depakote]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[louisiana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spina bifida]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spinal cord defect]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=6686</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Lejune, Abbott, Depakote &#38; Birth Defect:  A recent case in the United States District Court, S.D. Illinois ruled on a motion for summary judgment. The Lejune, Abbott, Depakote &#38; Birth Defect case documents what the children of many women that took Depakote for a health concern (e.g. migraine headache, anti-epilepsy drug), during pregnancy may face today &#8211; a potential [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/lejune-abbott-depakote-birth-defect/">Lejune, Abbott, Depakote &#038; Birth Defect</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Forbes, Abbott, Depakote &#038; Birth Defect</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/forbes-abbott-depakote-birth-defect/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2015 15:59:49 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Watch℠]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abbott]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anti-epilepsy drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[depakote]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[migraine headache]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mild depression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missouri]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pregnancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pregnant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spina bifida]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=6680</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Forbes, Abbott, Depakote &#38; Birth Defect:  A recent case in the United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division ruled on a protective order. The Forbes, Abbott, Depakote &#38; Birth Defect case documents what the children of many women that took Depakote for a health concern (e.g. migraine headache, anti-epilepsy drug), during pregnancy may face today &#8211; a potential [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/forbes-abbott-depakote-birth-defect/">Forbes, Abbott, Depakote &#038; Birth Defect</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Kiker, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#038; Birth Defects</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/kiker-smithkline-beecham-paxil-birth-defects/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2014 17:58:11 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Watch℠]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[depression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[glaxosmithkline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infant respiratory distress syndrome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paxil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pregnant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smithkline beecham]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ventricular septal defect]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=6080</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Kiker, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#38; Birth Defects: A recent case in the United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania recently ruled on a motion to remand. Kiker, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#38; Birth Defects case documents what many paxil prescription drug users may be experiencing today – potential birth defects in their child from the use of paxil (e.g., [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/kiker-smithkline-beecham-paxil-birth-defects/">Kiker, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#038; Birth Defects</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>A.S., Minor, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#038; Birth Defects</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/a-s-minor-smithkline-beecham-paxil-birth-defects/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2014 19:08:31 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Watch℠]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congenital birth defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[glaxosmithkline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ingested Paxil while pregnant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paxil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pregnant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smithkline beecham]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=6020</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>A.S., Minor, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#38; Birth Defects: A recent case in the United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit recently ruled on a motion to remand. A.S., Minor, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#38; Birth Defects case documents what many paxil prescription drug users may be experiencing today – potential birth defects in their child from the [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/a-s-minor-smithkline-beecham-paxil-birth-defects/">A.S., Minor, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#038; Birth Defects</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Orrick, Minor, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#038; Birth Defects</title>
		<link>https://legalsleuth.com/orrick-minor-smithkline-beecham-paxil-birth-defects/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Sleuth®]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2014 18:52:26 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Birth Defect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Watch℠]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prescription Drug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congenital birth defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[glaxosmithkline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[heart defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lung defects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missouri]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paxil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pphn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pregnancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smithkline beecham]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[St. Louis]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalsleuth.com/?p=5904</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Orrick, Minor, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#38; Birth Defects: A recent case in the United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division recently ruled on a motion remand. Orrick, Minor, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#38; Birth Defects case documents what many paxil prescription drug users may be experiencing today – potential birth defects in their child from the use [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://legalsleuth.com/orrick-minor-smithkline-beecham-paxil-birth-defects/">Orrick, Minor, Smithkline Beecham, Paxil &#038; Birth Defects</a> appeared first on <a href="https://legalsleuth.com">Legal Sleuth®</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
