
    Tracy Lynn HOWARD, Plaintiff— Appellant v. ARROW INTERNATIONAL INC., Defendant — Appellee.
    No. 08-30279
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Oct. 1, 2008.
    Kelly Edward Balfour, Baton Rouge, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Kim E. Moore, Irwin, Fritchie, Urquhart & Moore, New Orleans, LA, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before REAVLEY, WIENER, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The judgment of the district court is affirmed for the following reasons:

1. This court relies upon the recitation in the record that no defendant remains in the case other than Arrow International to conclude that we have jurisdiction of the appeal from a final judgment dismissing the claims against Arrow.
2. Testimony that a product could have been defective will not support a finding that it was defective.
3. Appellant states the appeal by saying that the fact that the catheter broke with Doctor Myers’ statement (which was that the break was likely caused by excessive force in its removal, although a defect was a possibility), raises an issue of material fact. A possibility that a defect existed, that could possibly have caused the product to break, presents no factual issue for appellant’s claim.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     