Judge Chesney: ExThera Medical ONCObind Cancer Fraud Lawsuit Advances

• A federal judge is leaning towards advancing additional claims in the ExThera Medical ONCObind cancer fraud lawsuit.
• The lawsuit alleges ExThera Medical Corporation falsely marketed its ONCObind blood filter as a cancer cure, leading to patient deaths and worsening conditions.
• Judge Maxine Chesney indicated ExThera could be held liable for promotional statements made by a former board member presented as a company spokesperson.
• Plaintiffs have strengthened their negligence and wrongful death claims by asserting medical professionals will attest to direct causation.
• The court expressed skepticism regarding claims of information dissemination within a support group and the viewing of specific website sections.

This ExThera Medical ONCObind cancer fraud lawsuit underscores the intense scrutiny faced by medical device companies regarding unsubstantiated claims and highlights the critical importance of clear, defensible marketing to avoid allegations of medical device false advertising and potential wrongful death.

The ExThera Medical ONCObind cancer fraud lawsuit centers on allegations against ExThera Medical Corporation, a company that developed a blood filtration device. Initially, the Seraph 100 blood filter showed promise during the pandemic for treating Covid-19. However, the plaintiffs contend that ExThera later marketed a version of this technology, named ONCObind, as a "medical miracle" capable of curing metastatic cancer by removing circulating tumor cells from the bloodstream.

These ONCObind blood filter claims led patients to seek treatment on the Caribbean island of Antigua, where each round cost $45,000. The lawsuit, filed in March 2025, asserts that rather than finding a cure, at least three patients died within days or weeks of returning from Antigua after receiving the treatment. Furthermore, many other patients allegedly experienced worsening health conditions and increased cancer markers, directly contradicting the company's promotional assertions.

U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney, a Bill Clinton appointee, is overseeing the ExThera Medical Corporation litigation and has provided significant indications regarding the path forward for the case. While Judge Chesney previously dismissed claims related to RICO, battery, negligence, and wrongful death, she allowed fraud and emotional distress claims to proceed. Now, the court is leaning towards advancing additional claims, particularly concerning corporate liability for statements made by a former board member.

A pivotal aspect of the current proceedings involves a promotional video featured on ExThera’s website, where former board member John Preston was introduced as "Director, ExThera Medical." In this video, Preston made specific ONCObind blood filter claims, including the assertion that four hours on the filter represented "the difference between life and death." Judge Chesney indicated that plaintiffs could reasonably perceive Preston as acting as a company spokesperson, thereby potentially holding ExThera liable for his statements. The judge also signaled that the plaintiffs have successfully addressed prior deficiencies in their negligence and wrongful death medical device claims by adding a crucial line to their amended complaint, stating that "Doctors will attest that ExThera’s actions directly caused these plaintiffs’ deaths." This amendment, the judge noted, provides the necessary professional substantiation for such serious allegations.

Despite these advancements for the plaintiffs, Judge Chesney expressed reservations about certain aspects of their case. She appeared unconvinced that ExThera should be held responsible for the alleged misrepresentations conveyed within a "cancer wives" support group. Specifically, the judge questioned whether ExThera's former Chief Regulatory Officer and Vice President of Clinical, Regulatory, and Medical Affairs, Dr. Sanja Ilic, could have reasonably anticipated that two wives, Ms. Hudlow and Ms. Baskin, would relay specific statements to a third patient’s wife, Ms. Bowen. The judge noted a lack of evidence that Ilic knew these specific statements would be conveyed.

Furthermore, the court raised concerns regarding the plaintiffs' claims about information presented on specific sections of ExThera’s website, such as a banner or FAQ page. Judge Chesney emphasized that for these claims to be viable, the plaintiffs must explicitly state that they actually viewed these particular sections. A formal ruling on the motions to dismiss was issued on May 28, 2026, which allowed certain claims to proceed to discovery and trial. Annie Wanless, representing the plaintiffs from Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, expressed optimism that the court will allow the claims to proceed to discovery and trial. This ExThera Medical ONCObind cancer fraud lawsuit underscores the intense scrutiny faced by medical device companies regarding unsubstantiated claims and highlights the critical importance of clear, defensible marketing to avoid allegations of medical device false advertising and potential wrongful death.

Lawyers advising medical device companies should note the potential for corporate liability stemming from promotional statements made by board members, even if not directly employed, if they are presented as company spokespersons. This case highlights the ongoing scrutiny of unsubstantiated medical claims and the importance of clear, defensible marketing, particularly for novel treatments like blood filtration for cancer, to avoid fraud and wrongful death claims.

Source: Original reporting via Courthouse News