When you serve in the U.S. Military and sacrifice time with your family and loved ones to protect the lives and freedom of others, you shouldn’t have to worry about hearing loss and other related health issues. That is unfortunately not the case for a large number of servicemen and women, as the Minnesota-based company 3M sold millions of defective combat earplugs between 2003 and 2015. The product in question, 3M’s second version of their dual-ended Combat ArmsTM Earplugs, which contained undisclosed defects, and were standard issue for those serving in areas such as Afghanistan and Iraq.
If you or a loved one has developed hearing-related issues following the use of 3M’s Combat ArmsTM Earplugs, contact the Texas mass tort lawyers at Begum Law Group Injury Lawyers about participating in the 3M Combat Earplugs lawsuit. The Law Giant can explain your legal options, and help you choose a course of action moving forward.
The Combat ArmsTM Earplugs were designed with two purposes:
The earplugs were designed with the intent that wearers would still be able to hear officer’s commands when the earplugs were worn with the yellow end in their ears. However, the ends of these earplugs were too short, making them too loose to fit in many soldiers’ ears properly.
This is what’s known as a design defect, meaning that the intended design of the earplugs was inherently flawed with the final product carrying an unnecessary risk of harm. Other examples of product designs are commonly seen in poorly designed power tools, where safety or other features were not properly considered, making the item dangerous to use.
As such, those who were issued these earplugs could be suffering from hearing loss, the symptoms of which include:
The defective earplugs can also cause tinnitus, which is a persistent noise or ringing in the ears. The condition can be related to greater hearing loss or a more serious ear injury, so if you experience a ringing, buzzing, or low hissing sound in your ears, reach out to a Texas product liability attorney at our firm to learn about what options you have moving forward.
After a whistleblower allegation that 3M knowingly sold these faulty earplugs to the U.S. Military despite knowing of their defects, the company paid $9.1 million to resolve the accusations against them. However, this settlement agreement only compensated the U.S. government for the money they spent on the Combat ArmsTM Earplugs.
While this is a telling result on behalf of 3M, this amounted to little more than a partial refund for what the military paid for a faulty product. It did not compensate the soldiers and other servicemembers who suffered as a result of prolonged use of the product.
*The outcome of any individual case depends on factors unique to that case. Past case results listed on this website do not guarantee or predict a similar result in any similar or future case.
The original allegations against 3M for the faulty earplugs were filed under the qui tam provision of the False Claims Act. This is a federal statute that punishes parties that defraud government programs and agencies – including military branches. Per the U.S. Department of Justice, the Act provides parties the opportunities to “sue on behalf of the government when they believe that defendants submitted false claims for government funds and to share in any recovery.”
This means that those who incurred hearing loss or other related issues can now file claims to seek compensation for their damages. The VA reports that more than 2.6 million veterans are receive disability compensation for hearing loss and tinnitus.
You may be eligible to recover compensation from 3M if you:
Under the law, if you’ve suffered as a result of using 3M’s Combat ArmsTM Earplugs, you may be able to recover your:
5.0 Google Reviews. Out of Almost 400 Reviews.
In a typical product liability case, you must prove various elements to secure compensation, including:
In the case of 3M’s Combat ArmsTM Earplugs, the matter may be best resolved through a mass tort. These are civil actions usually made up of individual lawsuits against the same defendant. The plaintiffs, who all have independent lawsuits, claim that the same party caused all of them harm through the same or similar circumstances. For example, the various servicemembers who suffered adverse effects may each file lawsuits against 3M claiming that the defective earplugs caused them significant harm.
The main benefit for participating in a mass tort is several individual plaintiffs pooling their resources. This allows individual lawsuits to consolidate their efforts between attorneys, streamline various processes, and ensure that the case moves as efficiently as possible.