backtop


Print 110 comment(s) - last by clovell.. on Nov 12 at 3:19 PM

Suit alleges that AMD recklessly exposed its employees to toxic substances

Ryan Ruiz, 16, of Austin Texas, shares the same last name with Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) CEO Hector Ruiz.  Ryan, sadly, is the victim of a birth defect.  He is missing the lower right part of his arm and had significant cognitive impairment.  The unfortunate irony of his last name comes in that his conditions are allegedly caused by Hector Ruiz's company, AMD.

Ryan's mom, Maria Ruiz, worked in AMD's Fab 14 clean room from 1988 to 2002.  She was exposed to a wide array of toxic chemicals during her employment with AMD, including ethylene glycol monoethyl ether acetate and 2-ethoxyethyl acetate, known to cause birth defects.  During her employment she had to seek medical attention at least twice due to fume inhalation.

Her exposure concerned her when she discovered she was pregnant.  She inquired about health risks with a local doctor at the Austin Regional Clinic, but was told not to worry about it, and to feel free to return to work.  AMD was perfectly happy to take her back, and she worked most of the remaining course of her pregnancy, continuously exposed to chemicals that are known in the medical community to cause birth defects.

The ending of story is the tragic one previously stated -- her son was born missing part of a limb and with brain damage.

Now Maria is taking the fight to the corporation she feels damaged her and her son.  The lawsuit, filed in Travis County District Court, both targets AMD and includes medical malpractice allegations against the doctors at the clinic she went to for medical consultation.  It names a family/occupational health practitioner and an obstetrics and gynecology specialist, George Marking MD and Alinda Cox MD.  These doctors, according the suit, failed to warn Maria about any possible risks of working with the toxic chemicals at her place of employment, during her pregnancy.

The Ruiz vs. AMD Lawsuit has some high power representation in the form of filing attorney Adam S. Ward, a partner in Allison & Ward, LLP and Steven Phillips of Levy Phillips & Konigsberg LLP (New York).  The enlistment of Levy Phillips & Konigsberg LLP draws attention, in particular, because the firm successfully won an undisclosed settlement for IBM clean-room exposure victims in a similar case.

"Like millions of Americans, Maria Ruiz did not realize that 'clean rooms' are designed to keep damaging dust particles from semiconductor wafers during manufacturing, not to protect men and women exposed to a spectrum of hazardous chemicals and fumes," said Steven Phillips of Levy Phillips & Konigsberg LLP, co-counsel in the case.

The representing firm Allison & Ward, LLP has been airing commercial on local TV in Texas seeking people with knowledge of the clean room, for possible testimony.

The suit seeks exemplary damages and includes a five-count petition charging negligence, breach of warranty, fraudulent concealment and misrepresentation.

AMD doesn't really need much more bad news.  With another weak graphics card launch, another losing quarter, debts piling up, and rivals NVIDIA and Intel piling up record profits, AMD has scant room for more negative press or losses.  Thus this suit marks the kind of sad sort of story in which there are no winners.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Who's fault?
By BaliBabyDoc on 11/10/2007 6:47:55 PM , Rating: 2
A 'study' with an n=1 isn't data. It's a published anecdote.

Fetal alcohol syndrome by definition requires exposure to alcohol PLUS multiple elements present in the child. Anyone claiming that alcohol consumption plus incidental mechanical banding would explain this kid doesn't know jack about either. If this kid was even in the ballpark of FAS no law firm would waste 5 minutes on it. It would be a total loser, that not even the drama queen (John Edwards) could pull off.

http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_arc99/3_27_99/...
--
Of the 125 exposed women, 75 had complained during pregnancy that organic chemicals were giving them headaches or breathing problems. Of the 13 major defects in the exposed group, 12 occurred in babies born to these women.
---

Hmm, that sounds familiar.
' According to the petition, Ruiz alleged that before she became pregnant, she sought medical attention on two different occasions for symptoms she said were related to exposure to the chemicals used in the clean room. AMD allegedly told Ruiz that her exposure was within acceptable limits and that the chemicals were safe '

The burden of proof falls to AMD for proving safety . . . for pregnant women. If such evidence did not exist then they (and the doctor) are indeed liable.

As a doctor (that hasn't been sued . . . yet), the burden will be in the documentation. If the MD's clinic note suggests no risk then he's toast. If he's a contract employee of AMD, they are toast as well. For AMD to lose, all the plaintiffs need: 1) plausible causation - got it and 2) negligence. The latter is as simple as showing AMD was indifferent to the particular sensitivity of pregnant women to environmental insults.


"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer

Related Articles
Intel Quarterly Profit up 43 Percent
October 16, 2007, 9:39 PM
AMD's Large Debt Mounting Up Fast
April 29, 2007, 1:54 PM



Latest Headlines
4/21/2014 Hardware Reviews
April 21, 2014, 12:46 PM
4/16/2014 Hardware Reviews
April 16, 2014, 9:01 AM
4/15/2014 Hardware Reviews
April 15, 2014, 11:30 AM
4/11/2014 Hardware Reviews
April 11, 2014, 11:03 AM










botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki