DISCLAIMER:  Any unofficial case summaries below are prepared by the clerk's office
                        as a courtesy to the reader. They are not part of the opinion of the court.

192899P.pdf   08/16/2021  George Amador  v.  3M Company
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  19-2899
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota   
   [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Kelly and Grasz, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Products Liability - Bair Hugger Forced Air Warming Devices 
   Products Liability Litigation. Plaintiffs asserted they contracted 
   periprosthetic joint infections due to use of 3M's Bair Hugger, a 
   convective or forced air patient warming device, during their 
   orthopedic-implant surgeries. On 3M's motion, the district court excluded 
   plaintiffs' general-causation medical experts, as well as one of their 
   engineering experts, and granted 3M's motion for summary judgment as to 
   all plaintiffs' claims. Held: the district court erred in excluding 
   plaintiffs' general-cause medical experts and erred, in part, in excluding 
   the engineering expert. The grant of summary judgment is reversed. 
   Further, the district court's order denying certain of plaintiff's 
   discovery requests is affirmed. The district court's order sealing certain 
   documents is affirmed, and plaintiffs' motion to unseal the documents on 
   this court's docket is denied.