Scope Infection Claim? You Don't Need to Know the Manufacturer

The Question That Stops People From Calling

Many people who got a serious infection after an ERCP or another scope procedure think they need answers before they can talk to a lawyer. Which company made the scope? What was the bacteria called? If they were moved between hospitals during a hard recovery, they may not even be sure where the procedure took place.

You don’t need any of that. A claimant does not need to know the scope’s manufacturer, its model, the organism, or even the facility. Hospitals and labs keep those details in their records, and finding them is the legal team’s work after you reach out.

Recent reporting has covered new lawsuits against Olympus over sepsis after ERCP and over a fatal VRE infection. Claims have also been brought against Fujifilm and Pentax. Each case rests on the allegation that a reusable flexible scope carried drug-resistant bacteria from one patient to another. No court has found that any manufacturer’s design caused the infections at issue.

These Claims Are Filed One at a Time

Most of the litigation covered on this site goes through a consolidated proceeding. Scope infection claims don’t. There is no MDL and no class action for them. Each claim is filed on its own, in a state or federal court.

That makes your own state’s law decisive. It sets how long you have to file and what you have to prove. The defenses a manufacturer can raise also differ from state to state.

Some states start the filing clock on the date of the injury. Others start it when a patient learned, or reasonably should have learned, that the infection might be connected to the scope. Wrongful death claims often have a separate deadline.

The Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School explains statutes of limitations in general terms. The deadline that applies to you depends on where the procedure took place and where you live, and it can be shorter than people expect. That is a reason to ask early, before you have gathered a single record.

When a claim is filed in federal court, it follows the federal civil process the U.S. Courts website describes. Even there, the court applies state law to most of the questions that matter.

Where the Scope’s Identity Is Recorded

Hospitals and endoscopy centers generally track which scope was used on which patient, because reprocessing is documented scope by scope. That information usually appears in four places:

• The procedure report, which at many facilities lists the scope model and sometimes a serial number
• Reprocessing logs, which record the cleaning and disinfection cycle a scope went through before your procedure
• Equipment and service records, including repair history and any manufacturer maintenance
• Infection control files, if the facility looked into a cluster of related infections

Patients rarely see most of these. A reprocessing log, for example, is not part of the chart you can download from a patient portal. A lawyer can request records directly from the facility and, once a case is filed, can seek more through discovery.

If the facility found a problem on its own, you may already have a lead. Some hospitals have notified patients after identifying a possible scope-related exposure, as reported in the UCLA superbug cases that later led to a lawsuit against duodenoscope makers. A letter like that helps. Not having one does not count against you.

Where the Organism Is Recorded

The name of the bacteria comes from lab work. Blood cultures, bile cultures and other specimen tests identify the organism. Susceptibility testing then shows which antibiotics it resisted.

Claims after scope procedures have involved carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE), Pseudomonas, E. coli and Klebsiella, among others. A doctor at the bedside may only have told you it was a “superbug” or “a resistant infection.” That is enough to start. The lab reports and discharge summary will fill in the rest.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention publishes background on healthcare-associated infections and antibiotic resistance if you want to understand what a lab result means. A lawyer reviewing your claim will read those same reports alongside your medical history.

When You Are Not Sure Which Facility It Was

People recovering from sepsis often lose days or weeks. A transfer from an outpatient center to a hospital can blur into one long stretch.

The paper trail usually survives. Explanation of benefits statements from a private insurer, Medicare summary notices, hospital bills and payment receipts each list the provider and the date of service. Pharmacy records for the antibiotics you were prescribed lead back to the doctor who ordered them.

Family members who drove you to the procedure or sat with you afterward often remember more than you do, so ask them. If you can’t piece it together at all, say so when you reach out. Plenty of people start there.

What Happens After You Reach Out

A review usually starts with a conversation about roughly when the procedure happened and when you got sick. Approximate dates are fine.

With your written authorization, the legal team then requests records. Medical records come first, then lab results, then whatever equipment and reprocessing documents the facility will release before a case is filed.

Once the records are in, the team can see whether the timing of the infection lines up with the procedure and which scope was used. Some reviews end there, with an honest answer that the records don’t support a claim. That answer is worth having too, and the review costs you nothing.

What the FDA Has Said, and What It Has Not

Since 2015, FDA safety communications have raised the concern that the design of duodenoscopes, the scopes used in ERCP, can make them hard to clean fully between patients. The agency’s device communications are available through the FDA’s medical devices section.

Coverage of these lawsuits often cites two more recent Olympus events, and both need careful reading. The June 2025 import alert on Olympus covers bronchoscopes, laparoscopes, ureterorenoscopes and reprocessors. It does not cover duodenoscopes. For the February 2026 correction to the MAJ-1443 and MAJ-1444 valves, Olympus reported that it had received no infection complaints.

Neither event shows that anyone was infected. Anyone who presents either one as proof of an infection has the facts wrong, and you should expect better from whoever evaluates your claim.

What the Lawsuits Allege About Design

Many of these cases focus on the tip of the duodenoscope, where a small moving part called the elevator raises instruments into position. Plaintiffs allege that its crevices can trap debris and bacteria that survive reprocessing even when staff follow the manufacturer’s instructions. Some claims also allege that the warnings and cleaning instructions were inadequate.

Those questions are contested. Each case will be decided on its own record and under its own state’s law, and a result in one courtroom does not decide another. Published studies of outbreaks linked to scopes are indexed on PubMed if you want to read the medical literature yourself.

If Someone You Love Died After a Scope Procedure

A family can ask about a wrongful death claim with very little to go on, such as an approximate date and a death certificate that lists sepsis. Who can file, and how soon, depends on the state. In many states, the personal representative of the estate brings the claim.

Requesting a loved one’s records can be painful. A legal team can make those requests so the family doesn’t have to.

Take the Next Step

If you got a serious infection after an ERCP, colonoscopy, bronchoscopy or other scope procedure, you can ask for a review with whatever you remember. You can learn more on our endoscope infection page, or start now with a free case review.

Tell us what you know, even if it’s only a rough date and the name of a city. We will tell you plainly whether we think your state’s law leaves room for a claim, and which records we would need to find out.