Paragard IUD Lawsuit Overview: Case Updates and Background

Paragard Lawsuit Overview

Paragard, a popular intrauterine contraceptive device (IUD), has become the focus of several lawsuits due to complications during removal.

Since 2020, thousands of women have alleged that the device broke apart during extraction and caused severe health complications like infections, chronic pain, organ damage, and infertility. Many of Paragard’s victims required extensive medical care, including surgeries to retrieve embedded device fragments. Some even had to undergo hysterectomies. 

Lawsuits against Paragard’s manufacturers (Teva Pharmaceuticals and CooperSurgical) claim that the companies failed to provide adequate warnings about these risks and seek compensation for medical expenses and the emotional distress caused by their negligence. 

Currently, over 2,700 lawsuits are consolidated under a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) in the Northern District of Georgia. This process makes it easier for the court to handle cases that share similar facts while still treating each person’s claim as an independent lawsuit.​ 

Based on the number of adverse events associated with the Paragard device, legal experts expect thousands more cases to be added to the MDL. If you or a loved one was injured by the Paragard IUD, get in touch with Tosi Law today to discuss your legal options and explore the possibility of filing a lawsuit.

Find Out if You Qualify For Compensation

If your Paragard IUD caused health complications, you may be eligible to file a lawsuit against Teva Pharmaceuticals and CooperSurgical. Qualification typically depends on factors such as the type of injury you experienced and the device’s role in causing it.

There are also timeline considerations. Many U.S. states have statutes of limitations that could impact your ability to file, and understanding these deadlines usually requires expert legal guidance.

Tosi Law is here to help you navigate these challenges and determine your eligibility. We offer a free consultation to assess your case and provide clear, transparent advice. With no upfront fees and a contingency-based approach, we only get paid if we secure compensation for you.

Contact us today to find out if you qualify and take the first step toward pursuing justice and recovering the costs of your injury.

Article Summary: What You Need to Know

1. Paragard, a popular non-hormonal IUD, is prone to breakage when it is removed from the patient’s uterus, leaving fragments embedded in the patient’s body and causing severe injuries.
2. Common injuries linked to Paragard breakage include infections, chronic pain, organ perforation, and infertility.
3. Thousands of lawsuits have been filed against Paragard’s manufacturers, Teva Pharmaceuticals and CooperSurgical, alleging that the companies failed to warn users about this risk.
4. More than 2,700 Paragard cases are currently part of multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Northern District of Georgia, with bellwether trials scheduled for 2025.
5. Plaintiffs who have suffered due to Paragard may be eligible for compensation, covering medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering.
6. Partnering with the right law firm is essential if you want to file a successful claim against Teva/Coopersurgical. Tosi Law is ready to advise on your case’s eligibility and file a lawsuit on your behalf. Contact us today.

Latest Paragard Lawsuit Updates

October 2024: First Bellwether Trial Scheduled to Begin

The first bellwether trial in the Paragard MDL will take place on October 28, 2024. These trials are important because they indicate how juries react to common evidence and arguments shared across multiple individual lawsuits. 

The outcome of this trial will help predict how future Paragard cases might unfold and will play a significant role in guiding settlement negotiations for the remaining lawsuits. A favorable result for plaintiffs could pressure the defendants into offering larger settlements in an effort to avoid trials that are unlikely to go their way.

July 2024: Defendants Accused of Withholding Evidence in Motion to Compel

On July 1, 2024, Teva Pharmaceuticals and CooperSurgical were accused of withholding key documents that could reveal they knew about the risks of Paragard IUD breakage but failed to issue adequate warnings. 

In response, plaintiff attorneys filed a motion to compel the release of these documents to strengthen their case.​ The delay in discovery has fueled speculation that the defendants are trying to conceal evidence that would damage their case or force plaintiffs into accepting lower settlement offers.

The motion is expected to be addressed by the court before the first bellwether trial starts at the end of October 2024.

August 2024: Defendants File Motion to Dismiss Cases Based on Statute of Limitations

Teva Pharmaceuticals and CooperSurgical requested the dismissal of multiple Paragard cases, arguing that some victims didn’t file their lawsuits within the legally allotted timeframes.

If successful, the motion could eliminate some cases, especially those involving older injuries. However, these dismissals are expected to be minimal since many plaintiffs only recently connected their injuries to the Paragard IUD​.

This strategy could indicate that the defendants seek to limit the number of inevitable settlements since they are challenging cases based on technicalities rather than their legal merits.

July 2024: Motion Filed to Add Teva Ltd. as a Defendant

In July 2024, plaintiffs in the Paragard MDL filed a motion to include Teva Ltd—the Israeli parent company of Teva Pharmaceuticals USA—in the complaint. 

Initially, only the U.S.-based subsidiary was named as co-defendant along with CooperSurgical. But if the motion is approved, Teva Ltd.’s considerable financial resources will become available for potential settlements. This could open the door to larger settlement offers and significantly impact the company’s defense strategy, possibly reducing its appetite for prolonged litigation.

The court has not yet ruled on this motion, but a decision is expected during the October 2024 status conference. Approval would be a considerable advantage for plaintiffs and their legal teams.

June 2024: Judge Rules That State Laws Will Govern Individual Cases

Judge Leigh Martin May of the Northern District of Georgia ruled that each Paragard lawsuit would be governed by the laws of the state where it was initially filed. 

From a plaintiff’s perspective, this decision affects the time periods during which they could file a valid lawsuit and the minimum/maximum amounts they could be awarded if juries rule in their favor. Highlights the need for legal representation familiar with the state’s product liability laws. 

From Teva and CooperSurgical’s point of view, this ruling complicates their defense’s strategy considerably since their legal team would need to adjust its approach for each state in which a lawsuit is filed. 

These complications and the subsequent inflation of legal costs could potentially make the defendants more receptive to settlement negotiations.

July 2024: Paragard MDL Cases Increase to Over 2,700

In July 2024, the number of lawsuits in the Paragard MDL rose to over 2,700 as more women came forward with claims that their Paragard IUD caused severe health complications after breaking during removal.

When the MDL was first established in December 2020, it comprised only 60 lawsuits, illustrating the widespread damage this device caused and the growing public awareness of Teva/CooperSurgical’s potential accountability.

This growth in the number of lawsuits is also reflected in the number of adverse event reports filed with the FDA since the MDL began. In 2022, the FDA received nearly three times as many reports of Paragard breakage as it had in 2020.

A Closer Look at Paragard and the Injuries It Caused

What is Paragard and How Does it Work?

Paragard is a non-hormonal intrauterine device (IUD) used for long-term birth control. Unlike hormonal IUDs that release synthetic hormones, Paragard uses copper, which acts as a natural spermicide.

Paragard’s manufacturers claim that the device is effective for up to 10 years after insertion and offers long-lasting contraception without the daily concerns of other options like the pill.

In addition to being used for routine birth control, Paragard can also serve as emergency contraception if inserted within five days of unprotected sex, making it a feasible, albeit unlikely, contingency option for preventing pregnancy.

The device is a small, T-shaped plastic frame wrapped with copper wire that releases trace amounts of copper ions into the uterine lining. These ions alter the chemical environment in the uterus and fallopian tubes, disrupting sperm motility and significantly reducing the likelihood of fertilization.

Copper also has antimicrobial properties, which can help reduce the risk of bacterial infections, although it does not protect against sexually transmitted infections (STIs)​.

Paragard’s popularity is also boosted by it being the only non-hormonal IUD available in the U.S. Typically, IUDs influence the female reproductive system by releasing hormones into the uterine environment, often causing unwanted side effects.

Paragard does not influence the patient’s hormonal balance, which makes it an extremely attractive contraceptive option for women who experience adverse reactions to hormonal birth control or have health conditions that make hormone-based treatments unsuitable.

How is Paragard Causing Injuries?

A significant manufacturing flaw in the Paragard device has led to numerous injury reports, particularly during its removal. The IUD’s plastic arms are designed to flex during removal – a feature that’s crucial to the process. 

Medical practitioners expect pliability during the process since the manufacturers specifically inform them that the Paragard device’s arms will fold upwards as the IUD is pulled out. However, in many cases, these arms become rigid over time, losing the elasticity healthcare providers have been instructed to expect. 

When this happens, the arms can break off inside the patient, and fragments of the IUD can become lodged in the uterus or other organs. This is an extremely serious outcome and can lead to severe health complications​.

Injuries Caused By the Paragard IUD

Women who experience Paragard breakage during removal have reported a range of injuries, including:

• Organ Perforation: The sharp plastic fragments from the broken Paragard device can puncture the uterus or other nearby organs like the cervix, bladder, or intestines. Uterine perforation is one of the most dangerous outcomes, sometimes leading to internal bleeding and scarring. In severe cases, perforation can lead to permanent organ damage.
• Infertility: In some cases, women have reported infertility as a direct result of the injuries caused by the broken IUD pieces, especially when the fragments puncture reproductive organs​.
• Device Migration: A fractured Paragard device can also migrate from its original position within the uterus, leading to complications like ectopic pregnancy or organ damage. Migration often necessitates highly invasive surgical interventions such as laparoscopy or laparotomy to locate and remove the device fragments.
• Infections: Leftover fragments from the device can lead to infections like pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). If left untreated, these infections can escalate into extremely dangerous conditions like sepsis.
• Sepsis: If fragments of the device are not fully removed and resultant infections go untreated, there is a risk of developing sepsis, a life-threatening condition that can lead to organ failure. Sepsis is particularly dangerous because it can progress rapidly if medical intervention is delayed​.
• Internal Bleeding: When Paragard breaks or migrates, it can cause internal bleeding within the uterus or other nearby organs. Bleeding may not always be immediately noticeable, but it can result in severe abdominal pain, dizziness, and fatigue. Internal bleeding can also cause abdominal swelling and pressure on nearby organs.
• Chronic Pain and Scarring: Women who have experienced Paragard-related injuries report suffering from chronic pelvic pain due to scarring caused by the device or from repeated surgeries.

Emotional and Psychological Damage Caused By Paragard Complications

While much of the attention on Paragard lawsuits focuses on physical injuries, there is growing recognition of the psychological toll experienced by women affected by the device’s failure and the subsequent impact on their reproductive health.

One key source of psychological trauma is the permanent effects of Paragard-related injuries, particularly infertility. For many women, the inability to conceive after undergoing reproductive trauma can be devastating, leading to anxiety, depression, and feelings of hopelessness, guilt, and worthlessness. 

Additionally, the process of undergoing multiple surgeries to remove broken IUD fragments can also result in mental health struggles. The fear of future complications, ongoing pain, and the potential for further medical procedures create an atmosphere of ongoing stress and trauma and even result in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

How Are Paragard Injuries Treated?

Treating options for Paragard injuries depend on the severity of the complications and the type of damage caused by the device. In most cases, medical intervention is required to remove the broken fragments, repair damaged tissue, or address infections and other complications.

Surgical Interventions

When Paragard breaks or migrates, surgical procedures are often necessary to remove fragments lodged in the uterus or other organs.

• Hysteroscopy: A minimally invasive procedure is often used when fragments of the Paragard IUD are still lodged in the uterus. The procedure involves a small scope that is inserted through the cervix to locate and remove the pieces.
• Laparoscopy: Another minimally invasive surgical option that involves a camera and surgical tools being inserted into the patient’s body via small abdominal incisions.
• Laparotomy: A more invasive surgical approach typically reserved for cases where fragments are deeply embedded or have caused extensive organ damage. This procedure involves larger incisions and longer recovery times.
• Hysterectomy: In extreme cases where the damage to the uterus is severe, a hysterectomy (removal of the uterus) may be necessary. This is considered a “last resort” intervention since it results in permanent infertility.

Treatment for Infections and Sepsis

In cases where Paragard fragments lead to infections, including pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), antibiotics are typically the first line of treatment. However, surgical intervention may be required to remove infected tissue. In extreme cases of infection, where sepsis develops, the patient would need urgent intravenous antibiotics and intensive care to prevent organ failure.

Management of Internal Bleeding

When internal bleeding occurs due to device perforation or migration, patients may need immediate medical attention. Severe cases would necessitate blood transfusions or surgical procedures to repair damaged organs and halt the bleeding.

Chronic Pain and Scarring Management

Long-term pain management is often necessary for women suffering from chronic pelvic pain as a result of IUD breakage. This can be caused by the device itself or by repeated surgical interventions. Pain management typically involves medication, physical therapy, or additional surgery to treat adhesions or scar tissue. 

Psychological and Emotional Care

Women affected by Paragard-related injuries often face considerable psychological trauma, especially those dealing with infertility or chronic pain. Treatment for emotional damage may involve counseling, therapy, or support groups to help manage feelings of loss, depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 

More About the Defendants: Teva Pharmaceuticals and CooperSurgical

Both Teva Pharmaceuticals and CooperSurgical have been involved in manufacturing and marketing the Paragard IUD, though their roles changed significantly in 2017. 

Teva, a global pharmaceutical company, originally launched Paragard in 1988 as part of its Women’s Health business, which included a portfolio of contraceptive products. However, as part of a strategic decision to divest from non-core assets, Teva sold Paragard to CooperSurgical in November 2017 for $1.1 billion. The sale was part of Teva’s larger strategy to reduce its debt and refocus on its specialty medicines portfolio​.

CooperSurgical, a division of The Cooper Companies, specializes in women’s health and fertility solutions. Upon acquiring Paragard, CooperSurgical took over the production and distribution of the IUD. The sale included Teva’s manufacturing facility in Buffalo, NY, where the Paragard IUD was produced. 

Failure To Warn: Teva and CooperSurgical’s Knowledge of the Defect 

The central issue in the lawsuits against Teva Pharmaceuticals and CooperSurgical is the claim that the companies failed to advise consumers and healthcare providers about the dangers associated with the Paragard IUD.

This falls under the legal principle of “failure to warn,” a critical aspect of product liability law stating that manufacturers are legally responsible for providing sufficient warnings about all potential risks their products might pose.

Victims and their legal teams allege that both Teva and CooperSurgical were aware (or should have been aware) of the risks their product posed but failed to disclose this information as they are legally obligated to do. 

Evidence from the FDA’s Federal Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, which contains thousands of entries describing instances of Paragard device breakage, suggests that both companies had access to consistent reports of adverse incidents. Despite this, manufacturers failed to update product warnings and accompanying instructions. 

Under product liability laws, manufacturers must create safe products and clearly communicate known risks. In this instance, plaintiffs argue that they would have chosen a different product or that their medical service providers could have prevented breakage had they known the extent of the risk.

The MDL is just getting started, and the results of the upcoming bellwether trials will set important precedents for how the courts will interpret the evidence proving Teva and CooperSurgical’s failure to warn. The outcome of these decisions will have a profound impact on future Paragard litigations and settlement negotiations.

The Paragard Lawsuit

Is the Paragard Lawsuit Currently Active?

Yes, the Paragard lawsuit is currently active. Numerous lawsuits have been filed against Teva Pharmaceuticals and CooperSurgical, primarily alleging that the Paragard IUD is prone to breakage during removal, leading to severe injuries. 

These cases have been consolidated into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Northern District of Georgia to streamline pretrial proceedings and gather evidence. The MDL is ongoing, with new cases still being filed, allowing injured individuals the opportunity to join the litigation and seek compensation.

Noteworthy Paragard Cases

Bowers v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA

In the case of Georgia Bowers v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, the plaintiff filed her complaint in September 2020 after her Paragard IUD broke during an attempted removal. 

She initially had the device inserted in January 2017, but when she returned to her doctor in September 2017 to remove it, only part of the device came out, with one IUD arm remaining embedded in her body. 

Despite her physician’s attempts to retrieve the fragment using a colposcopy, they were unsuccessful. 

Treadway v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA

Filed around the same time in September 2020, Carley Treadway v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA involves another severe injury case. 

Treadway received her Paragard in 2008 and went for removal in 2018. During the procedure, one arm of the IUD broke off and remained in her uterus. Her doctor subsequently performed a hysteroscopy to remove the fragment a month later. 

What is a Multidistrict Litigation?

A multidistrict litigation (MDL) is a federal process that consolidates the pretrial proceedings of many similar cases to streamline initial court proceedings. 

This approach benefits plaintiffs by enabling them to share resources, reduce legal expenses, and unify the discovery process, making complex litigation more cost-effective and allowing them to build a strong collective case against the defendants.

These pretrial proceedings are followed by bellwether trials: early “representative” cases within the MDL. The outcomes of these cases are closely monitored by legal teams on both sides of the lawsuit since they often set the tone for important court rulings and settlement negotiations. A favorable bellwether verdict for Paragard plaintiffs could result in large-scale settlements and avoid lengthy individual trials.

Statutes of Limitations in the Paragard Lawsuit

A statute of limitations is the legal deadline by which an individual must file a lawsuit following an injury or harm. For Paragard cases, this time frame varies by state, generally ranging from one to six years, depending on local laws. 

This window period typically begins either from the date of injury or from when a plaintiff discovered—or should have reasonably discovered—that their injuries were linked to the Paragard device.

Because these deadlines differ by state and can be difficult to interpret, legal guidance is essential. If you miss the statute of limitations, you may permanently lose the right to file a lawsuit and obtain compensation for medical costs, lost wages, and pain and suffering. 

Tosi Law’s experienced legal team can help you determine how much time you have to file a claim and what steps to take to protect your rights. We offer a free consultation, allowing you to understand your legal options with no obligation. 

Contact Tosi Law today to get the clarity you need and ensure your window for seeking justice remains open.

Paragard Lawsuit Compensation and Payouts

How is Paragard Compensation Calculated?

Compensation typically includes both economic and non-economic damages:

• Economic Damages cover medical bills, costs for additional surgeries, and lost wages.
• Non-Economic Damages address intangible impacts, like pain and suffering, emotional distress, and decreased life enjoyment.

To estimate non-economic damages, a multiplier is often applied to medical expenses. Plaintiffs are encouraged to document the full impact of their injuries to strengthen their claim, as more severe cases—such as those resulting in infertility or multiple surgeries—could yield higher payouts​.

If a case goes to trial, it is also possible that a jury might award punitive damages to the plaintiff. The purpose of punitive damages is to discourage the kind of corporate negligence that usually results in cases like these. 

Who is Eligible for Paragard Compensation?

Plaintiffs eligible for compensation are those who experienced significant injury from a Paragard device, specifically if the injuries were sustained from the device breaking during removal.

These injuries would often require invasive corrective procedures to avoid further complications, and they often result in long-term complications like scarring, infections, or infertility. 

Eligibility hinges on evidence linking injuries to Paragard breakage, meaning that a plaintiff should ideally have sufficient medical documentation to support their case.

What Size Payouts Are Expected for Paragard Claims?

The Paragard case’s payouts are difficult to gauge at this stage. Since there have been no settlements in any of the Paragard cases yet and the MDL is still in its early stages, any discussion about compensation amounts would be highly speculative.

How Many Paragard Claims Have Been Settled?

Currently, no Paragard cases have been settled. The MDL includes over 2,700 active cases, but with bellwether trials only getting started now, it’s unlikely that any of these will enter a settlement negotiation phase in 2024.

Filing a Paragard Claim

Establishing Your Eligibility for a Paragard Lawsuit

To be eligible for a Paragard lawsuit, you must have suffered injuries directly related to the device breaking upon removal. Common injuries include uterine perforation, organ damage, pelvic inflammatory disease, or infertility. 

Documentation linking these injuries to the Paragard IUD, such as medical records and physician notes, will help establish eligibility. 

Eligibility for any product liability case can be a complex thing to establish. Tosi Law has a team of case counselors ready to hear your story and give you expert guidance on whether you have a feasible case against Teva/CooperSurgical. 

Contact us today to discuss your case’s eligibility.

Is There a Time Limit to Filing a Paragard Lawsuit?

Yes, there is a statute of limitations for filing a Paragard lawsuit. Typically, a plaintiff has between one and six years to file their case, but the time limits applicable to your case are determined by your state’s product liability laws.

The time frame begins either from the date that you were injured by the Paragard device or when you discovered the link between your injury and the IUD’s breakage. 

Statutes of limitations play a crucial role in a case’s eligibility. That’s why it’s essential to get in touch with Tosi Law to discuss the particulars of your case as soon as possible. Delays could disqualify you from recovering your current and future medical expenses as well as obtaining compensation for your pain and suffering.

What Evidence is Necessary to Win a Paragard Lawsuit?

Successful claims require clear evidence showing that Paragard breakage directly caused the injuries in question. 

While compelling evidence can take many forms, a strong case is typically built on the following:

• Medical Records detailing the injury and the procedures required to remove Paragard fragments.
• Doctor’s Notes linking the injuries to Paragard’s alleged design flaws or breakage.
• Photographs or imaging such as X-rays or ultrasounds that display the device fragment lodged in your organs. 

How Much Does it Cost to Hire a Paragard Law Firm?

Tosi Law works on a contingency fee basis. That means you pay nothing upfront, and Tosi Law will subtract their fees as a percentage of your settlement or court-awarded winnings. 

If there isn’t a decision in your favor, there is no cost for you whatsoever. This arrangement allows you to pursue justice without the financial stress of hourly legal fees or retainer costs. 

By adopting a contingency approach, Tosi Law ensures that your attorney is fully invested in achieving the best possible outcome for you, as their fee is directly tied to the success of your case.

This approach makes high-quality legal representation accessible, allowing Paragard victims to focus on their recovery and trust that Tosi Law is working tirelessly in their best interest.

How to Choose the Right Lawyer for Your Paragard Lawsuit

Experience with Medical Device Lawsuits, Specifically Paragard

It’s essential that you work with a law firm that has proven experience in defective medical device claims, particularly those involving IUDs or similar devices. An experienced firm will be familiar with the complexities of Paragard’s alleged breakage issues and will know how to effectively present evidence of harm to secure a fair outcome.

Many firms, like Tosi Law, have already been involved in the early stages of the Paragard case and have built up a considerable amount of knowledge in this specific lawsuit.

Clear and Consistent Communication

The dynamic between a plaintiff and their legal representatives is one that thrives on professionalism, empathy, and trust. That’s why it’s vital you choose a law firm that understands the value of clear, proactive communication. 

Pursuing legal action against a large corporation can be a challenging endeavor, especially if it involves injuries as intimate and tragic as those experienced by Paragard victims. 

To ensure this process doesn’t become overwhelming, choose a law firm that regularly updates you on progress, explains every step in the legal journey patiently and professionally, and is available when you have questions. 

Resources for Effective Investigation and Litigation

Medical device lawsuits often require extensive resources for thorough investigation and litigation. This typically involves gathering expert testimonies, handling complex discovery processes, and working with medical professionals to establish the impact of the device on your health. 

Enquire about your prospective legal partner’s resources. Make sure the firm you select has the staff, network, and financial means necessary to build a strong case from start to finish.

Speak to Tosi Law About Filing a Paragard Lawsuit

If you’ve suffered injuries from a Paragard device breaking during removal, you are likely to be eligible to file a lawsuit against Teva Pharmaceuticals and CooperSurgical.

Speak to Tosi Law about your case today. We have a team of dedicated, in-house case counselors ready to hear your story and provide expert, professional, and empathetic legal guidance.

Get compensation for your suffering. Contact Tosi Law Today.

Call Tosi Law if You Have Questions

If you or a loved one has developed multiple myeloma or any other type of cancer after being exposed to Roundup, you could be entitled to compensation. Please call Tosi Law LLP at u003cstrongu003e888-311-8292u003c/strongu003e for more information. Our defective product lawyers are ready to help you file a Roundup lawsuit.

Call Today

FAQs

Who Can File a Paragard IUD Lawsuit?

Any individual who suffered complications from a Paragard IUD breaking, particularly during removal, may qualify to file a lawsuit. Common qualifying injuries include organ perforation, infections, chronic pain, and infertility. Prospective plaintiffs should confirm their eligibility with a law firm that’s experienced in defective medical device cases.

What Is the Expected Timeline for a Paragard Lawsuit?

The Paragard MDL is currently in the discovery phase, with bellwether trials anticipated in 2025. Many cases may not reach a resolution until 2026 or later, especially if large-scale settlement discussions follow the bellwether trials. However, some plaintiffs may receive settlement offers sooner, depending on the outcomes of early trials.

How Does the Paragard MDL Differ from a Class Action Lawsuit?

Paragard lawsuits are part of multidistrict litigation (MDL), not a class action. Unlike class actions, MDLs treat each case individually, allowing plaintiffs to seek compensation based on their specific injuries and losses. Cases within an MDL only share early-stage trial proceedings like pretrial motions and discovery, for the sake of consistency and efficiency.

What Happens if the Bellwether Trials Result in Favorable Verdicts for Plaintiffs?

Positive outcomes in the bellwether trials could encourage Teva Pharmaceuticals and CooperSurgical to settle other cases within the MDL. There are thousands of cases against the defendants, and if early verdicts favor plaintiffs, the companies may opt to avoid further litigation and take a route which is less disruptive to their bottom-line.

Is There a Time Limit to File a Paragard Lawsuit?

Yes, each state has its own statute of limitations, typically between one and six years. This timeframe begins either from the date that the injury occurred or when the plaintiff first realized their injuries were linked to the Paragard IUD. There are several factors that determine where your case falls within the window period where you can file a lawsuit. Speaking to a reputable, experienced law firm is essential in establishing your case’s timelines.