The Paragard IUD lawsuit challenges the safety and adequacy of the warnings for a popular copper IUD. Thousands of women report breakage during removal. Many needed procedures to retrieve fragments. Some underwent hysteroscopy. A few required hysterectomies. These stories drive a nationwide legal fight. Courts combined federal cases into one MDL in Atlanta. The litigation sits in the Northern District of Georgia under Judge Leigh Martin May. The court recognizes core claims about breakage during removal and resulting injuries.
Bellwether trials are scheduled for late 2025 to early 2026. The dates have shifted, yet the first two trial slots remain targeted for December 1, 2025, and February 2, 2026. Several outlets report the timetable and updates from recent scheduling orders. Paragard remains an FDA-approved contraceptive. Labels warn that breakage can occur, and removal can be complex. The label emphasizes the importance of checking for intact removal. Investigations noted additional labeling updates in 2024 after a federal safety review.
Fast facts at a glance
Readers want the status in seconds. Here are the essentials.
- MDL number: 1:20-md-02974, N.D. Georgia.
- Focus: Breakage during removal and retained fragments.
- Bellwethers: Planned for December 1, 2025, and February 2, 2026. Some coverage lists January 2026 as well.
- Case volume: About 3,300 actions pending as of June 2, 2025.
- Ownership: Teva sold Paragard to CooperSurgical in 2017.
- FDA posture: Product stays approved. Label highlights breakage and removal challenges. 2024 updates followed a safety review.
What the Paragard IUD Lawsuit alleges
Plaintiffs allege a design that can fail during removal. Breakage can leave copper arms or fragments in the uterus. Pain, bleeding, or infection may follow. Additional procedures can become necessary. Some women report fertility concerns after complications.
Claims focus on failure to warn and defect theories. Lawyers argue that patients did not receive adequate risk information. Media investigations echo concerns about poor notification of label updates. Articles document that many women never saw updated warnings.
Where the cases are and how MDL works
A federal MDL promotes efficient pretrial work. Discovery, expert challenges, and case selection happen together. The Paragard MDL sits in Atlanta. Judge May manages scheduling and orders.
Bellwether cases test evidence before juries. Results inform settlement posture. Early trials do not bind all cases. They give both sides real-world feedback on value. Scheduling orders set expert deadlines and a Daubert briefing. Recent orders refine those milestones.
Timeline of key milestones
A clear snapshot helps readers track progress.
| Year/Date Event | t |
|---|---|
| 1984 | FDA approves Paragard T-380A. |
| Nov 2017 | Teva completes Paragard sale to CooperSurgical for $ 1.1 billion. |
| Sept 2020 | JPML creates MDL 2974 in N.D. Georgia. |
| 2019 | Label adds breakage warnings and removal guidance. |
| 2021–2024 | FDA conducts a safety review of IUD breakage. 2024 label updates follow. |
| 2025 | MDL counts near 3,300 pending cases. Scheduling orders updated. |
| Dec 1, 2025 | First federal bellwether trial planned. |
| Feb 2, 2026 | Second bellwether trial planned. |
Who makes Paragard and why that matters
Teva built the brand for decades. CooperSurgical bought the product and related assets in 2017. Ownership affects defendants and the discovery scope. Plaintiffs target past and present companies.
Product stewardship questions sit at the center of the case. Plaintiffs seek documents about design, testing, and post-market surveillance. Public filings note that Paragard remains on the market today. Labels carry warnings about removal risks.
FDA labeling and safety signals
The current label instructs careful removal and inspection. It warns that breakage or embedment can complicate the removal process. It also advises clinicians to confirm an intact device after removal. The complete prescribing information lists techniques for difficult cases.
A national investigative series spurred additional scrutiny. The FDA acknowledged a safety review of IUD breakage starting in 2021. The agency later approved 2024 labeling changes. Newsrooms documented the timing and scope.
What injuries appear most often in claims
Patterns repeat across complaints. Patients report pain and abnormal bleeding. Others describe perforation, infection, or inflammation. Doctors sometimes find retained copper fragments. Hysteroscopy or laparoscopy may become necessary. Some women report fertility concerns.
Plaintiffs link injuries to breakage on removal. The claim is simple. A fragment that stays behind can harm tissue. Procedures to find and remove fragments add risk and cost.
Case counts, court posture, and momentum
The MDL hovers around the mid-3,000s. Numbers shift as cases transfer, settle, or dismiss. A June 2025 review reported 3,330 pending cases. Recent status updates describe continuing growth through spring and summer 2025.
Scheduling orders continue to evolve. Expert disclosures, Daubert motions, and trial selection remain on track, with recent orders establishing procedures for expert depositions and ensuring cost transparency.
Bellwether trials and why they matter
Bellwethers shape expectations for value: trials test design defect theories and evidence of warnings. Juries will hear about device structure, copper arms, and removal mechanics. They will see imaging and operative notes. They will consider long-term effects on fertility and quality of life.
Dates have moved several times. Public trackers list December 1, 2025, and February 2, 2026. Other trackers mention January 2026 adjustments. The pathway remains similar across sources. Parties are preparing experts and trial themes.
Settlement talks and value signals
Global settlements have not been announced. Commentators still speculate about ranges. Some firms predict mid-five-figure averages if a program emerges. Severe cases could exceed that level. Analysts base outlooks on injury severity, surgery count, and jury risk. These are projections, not promises.
Plaintiffs need strong documentation. Medical records and operative notes anchor valuation. Confirmation of retained fragments can help. Evidence of fertility impact can affect tiers. Settlement math often follows injury ladders.
Who may qualify to file a Paragard IUD Lawsuit?
Eligibility follows a pattern across firms. Lawyers usually screen for these items.
- Use of Paragard T-380A during the relevant period. Records should verify device type.
- Complication tied to removal or breakage. Symptoms include pain, bleeding, or infection. Imaging or surgery may reveal fragments.
- Treatment or procedure after the event. Hysteroscopy or laparoscopy often appears in records.
Statutes of limitation vary widely. Discovery rules can extend deadlines. State law controls timing. Lawyers advise fast action once the injury appears. Professional counsel is essential.
How to build a stronger claim
Start with a copy of your full chart. Ask for the operative note. Request any imaging. Keep procedure bills and pharmacy records. Save communications from clinics.
Next, create a simple timeline. Record insertion date. Record removal attempt. List each symptom and treatment. Note all procedures and outcomes.
Finally, consult counsel experienced in mass torts. Ask about the MDL process. Clarify costs and liens. Confirm document needs and deadlines.
Medical context that juries may hear
The device is a T-shaped polyethylene wrapped with copper. A string aids removal. Arms should fold on withdrawal. Fragments can remain if an arm snaps. Labeling warns about difficult removals and confirms intact checks.
Clinicians sometimes escalate care. Hysteroscopy can visualize and extract fragments. Laparoscopy can retrieve pieces that migrate. Rare cases lead to hysterectomy. Prescribers weigh risks against contraceptive benefits. Label language addresses removal strategy during pregnancy as well.
What top-ranking resources say right now
Legal news sites track every order. Reports confirm the MDL venue, pending case counts, and bellwether cadence. Coverage shows targets for December 2025 and February 2026. Some place the first trial in January 2026 after schedule changes. These summaries match the court’s overall posture.
Ranked pages also explain value drivers. Breakage during removal sits at the center. Retained fragments and extra procedures raise exposure. Analysts watch expert rulings in late 2025. Those decisions shape trial strength.
Practical checklist for patients
Clear steps help you act today.
- Confirm the device. Request the implant record and Paragard sticker.
- Collect proof of injury. Keep imaging, pathology, and procedure notes.
- Track expenses. Save bills, receipts, and time off records.
- Write a timeline. Include symptoms and care dates.
- Speak to counsel. Ask about eligibility and deadlines in your state.
Court sites do not screen claims. Law firms handle evaluation. The MDL consolidates cases after filing.
Frequently asked questions
Does the Paragard IUD have an FDA recall?
No recall exists. The product remains approved and on the market. Labels warn about breakage and removal challenges. The FDA approved language that addresses difficult removals. A federal safety review ended with label changes in 2024.
When will trials start?
Schedules changed several times. Current coverage points to December 1, 2025, and February 2, 2026. Some trackers list January 2026 after a prior adjustment. Court orders continue to refine deadlines.
How many cases are pending?
The count hovers slightly above 3,300 as of early June 2025. Numbers move as cases transfer, dismiss, or settle. Law firm trackers and court pages show trends.
Who are the defendants?
Claims target CooperSurgical today and legacy owner Teva. Corporate releases confirm the 2017 sale. Plaintiffs sue based on periods of control and conduct.
Conclusion: Why the Paragard IUD Lawsuit matters now
The Paragard IUD lawsuit seeks accountability for alleged breakage during the removal process. Women deserve reliable contraception and honest risk information. Many say they did not receive clear warnings. Many faced invasive procedures to retrieve fragments.
Court leadership continues to move the MDL forward. The schedule targets bellwethers across late 2025 and early 2026. Expert rulings will shape those trials. Settlement talks could follow either way. Coverage from ranked pages shows growing attention to timelines and expert battles.
Patients can act today. Records, timelines, and counsel build stronger claims. Federal pages explain the MDL structure and venue. Labels set expectations about removal risks and checks for intact devices. The Paragard IUD lawsuit remains a major case to watch this year.