MDL Track
MDL 3140
N.D. Fla.
Depo-Provera medroxyprogesterone acetate products liability
3,099 pending
Pharmaceutical · claims focused on contraceptive injection side effects and alleged long-term harms
Defendant
Pfizer Inc.
MDL / Track
MDL 3140
N.D. Fla.
Judge
Judge M. Casey Rodgers
Plaintiffs
932 pending
Bellwether / Trial
No verdicts yet
Settlement Status
Track litigations for free. Save this matter, capture notes, and monitor live signals.
Case overview
MDL-3140, In re: Depo-Provera (Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation, is centralized before Judge M. Casey Rodgers in the Northern District of Florida. Plaintiffs allege Pfizer failed to warn that prolonged use causes meningioma brain tumors, with over 130 federal cases consolidated as of mid-2025. The litigation faces a pivotal preemption defense and Daubert battles over general causation, with bellwether trials expected mid-to-late 2026.
Causation Theory
The primary causation theory rests on a 2024 French population-based case-control study finding a 5.6-fold increased risk of meningioma with prolonged use of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate. Plaintiffs argue Pfizer knew or should have known of this progestogen-meningioma mechanism since the 1980s. Secondary injury theories include irreversible bone mineral density loss, with FDA labeling warning against use beyond two years due to osteoporosis risk.
Case Management Orders
Litigation status
MDL No. 3140 in the Northern District of Florida before Judge M. Casey Rodgers held its ninth case management conference December 19, 2025, with Daubert hearings scheduled May 26-28, 2026, and first pilot case trial set December 7, 2026. The court ordered monthly status conferences throughout 2026 and mandated disclosure of pre-settlement litigation funding arrangements.
MDL Track
MDL 3140
N.D. Fla.
Depo-Provera medroxyprogesterone acetate products liability
3,099 pending
State Court Activity
332 cases in Delaware; 72 in New York; 21 in California; 6 in Illinois; single suits in Pennsylvania, Connecticut, New Mexico, Tennessee, Missouri
MDL 3140 Leadership
Plaintiff Leadership
Lead Counsel
Co-Lead Counsel
Liaison Counsel
Defense Leadership
Liaison Counsel
Geographic exposure
Projections estimate 30,000+ potentially eligible plaintiffs nationwide based on extended Depo-Provera use and meningioma/osteoporosis diagnoses. EMA recommended meningioma warnings; FDA label lacks equivalent warning.
MDL consolidated February 2025 before Judge M. Casey Rodgers. 1,200+ cases filed as of October 2025. Bellwether trials scheduled early 2026. Case Management Order No. 1 establishes discovery deadlines and proof of use/injury questionnaires.
Parallel state litigation active under consumer protection statutes. Original MDL motion sought N.D. California (Judges Orrick or Tigar) citing innovator liability laws allowing suits against Pfizer for generic use. Active filings continue.
High-profile parallel state court litigation moving independently of MDL. Consumer protection statutes favorable to plaintiffs. Cited as pressure point for national aggregate settlement discussions.
Active state court litigation alongside MDL. Judge Rodgers appointed liaison counsel to coordinate across jurisdictions including Pennsylvania.
Identified as key plaintiff residence state in MDL motion. Innovator liability laws permit suits against Pfizer for generic DMPA exposure.
Pfizer headquarters. Defendants sought MDL transfer to New York. State court filings viable given defendant presence.
Active plaintiff firm intake reported. Firms handling complex product liability in Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, and Washington, D.C.
Site of NIH SELF study (Study of Environment, Lifestyle & Fibroids) — 1,610 participants, 42.9% DMPA exposure rate. Epidemiological data on bone density and tumor outcomes.
Key defendants
Pfizer Inc.
Role: Manufacturer, NDA Holder
Primary target in MDL 3:25-md-03140 before Judge M. Casey Rodgers in N.D. Fla. Pushing preemption defense; Daubert hearings in spring 2025 largely preserved plaintiffs' expert testimony. Core exposure on failure-to-warn claims for meningioma risk.
Viatris Inc.
Role: Manufacturer
Named in MDL and individual complaints including 3:24-cv-06875-LB (N.D. Cal.). Co-defendant with Pfizer; litigation posture appears coordinated with Pfizer defense.
Prasco Laboratories
Role: Authorized Generic Manufacturer
Named defendant in 3:24-cv-06875-LB and MDL. Holds 'sizeable' U.S. market share per complaint. Smaller exposure profile than Pfizer/Viatris.
| Defendant | Role | Intelligence Note |
|---|---|---|
| Pfizer Inc. | Manufacturer, NDA Holder | Primary target in MDL 3:25-md-03140 before Judge M. Casey Rodgers in N.D. Fla. Pushing preemption defense; Daubert hearings in spring 2025 largely preserved plaintiffs' expert testimony. Core exposure on failure-to-warn claims for meningioma risk. |
| Viatris Inc. | Manufacturer | Named in MDL and individual complaints including 3:24-cv-06875-LB (N.D. Cal.). Co-defendant with Pfizer; litigation posture appears coordinated with Pfizer defense. |
| Prasco Laboratories | Authorized Generic Manufacturer | Named defendant in 3:24-cv-06875-LB and MDL. Holds 'sizeable' U.S. market share per complaint. Smaller exposure profile than Pfizer/Viatris. |
Timeline
Depo-Provera First Synthesized
Scientists at Upjohn Company first synthesize medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), the active ingredient in Depo-Provera.
FDA Denies Contraceptive Approval
FDA rejects Depo-Provera for contraceptive use, citing long-term safety concerns and potential cancer risks.
FDA Approves Depo-Provera
FDA grants approval for Depo-Provera as a contraceptive after nearly 30 years of regulatory battles.
FDA Issues Black Box Warning
FDA mandates Black Box Warning for bone mineral density loss, particularly with use beyond two years.
Study Links Progestins to Meningiomas
British Journal of Cancer publishes study correlating long-term progestin use with increased risk of hormone-sensitive brain tumors.
BMJ Study Confirms Meningioma Risk
Study published in The BMJ investigates association between progestogen use and intracranial meningioma risk.
First Lawsuits Filed Against Pfizer
Anapol Weiss and other firms file initial complaints against Pfizer alleging failure to warn of meningioma risks from long-term Depo-Provera use.
MDL No. 3140 Formed
JPML consolidates federal Depo-Provera cases into MDL No. 3140 in the Northern District of Florida, assigned to Judge M. Casey Rodgers.
MDL Exceeds 130 Cases
Depo-Provera MDL grows to over 130 filed cases, with coordinated discovery and pretrial management underway.
Bellwether Trials Scheduled for 2026
First bellwether trials set for early 2026 to test causation theories and damages; Daubert hearings in spring 2025 largely upheld plaintiff expert testimony.
Statute of limitations
No MDL established for Depo-Provera as of March 2026. First lawsuit filed October 2024. Critical accrual issue: March 2024 BMJ study established Depo-Provera-meningioma link, triggering discovery-rule arguments nationwide. Pfizer faces failure-to-warn claims; no federal preemption defense yet tested. Screen for diagnosis date AND date of discovery of causal link. States with 1-year SOL (KY, LA, TN) present imminent bar risk for pre-2024 diagnoses.
⚠Louisiana
1 year from discovery
Rule: La. Civ. Code art. 3492; discovery rule applies per March 2024 BMJ study establishing causal link
Discovery: Clock starts when plaintiff knew or should have known of Depo-Provera-meningioma connection, not diagnosis date alone
Shortest SOL nationwide; pre-2024 diagnoses at acute bar risk without discovery tolling
⚠Kentucky
1 year from discovery
Rule: Ky. Rev. Stat. § 413.140(1)(a); discovery rule recognized for latent injuries
Discovery: Accrues upon discovery of injury and its cause; March 2024 study triggers new knowledge
One-year window creates immediate intake urgency for any 2024 diagnoses
⚠Tennessee
1 year from discovery
Rule: Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104; discovery rule applies for latent diseases
Discovery: Accrues when injury is discovered or should have been discovered with reasonable diligence
No product liability repose statute; discovery rule critical for pre-2024 Depo use
California
2 years from discovery
Rule: Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 335.1; discovery rule codified at § 338
Discovery: Accrues upon discovery of injury and its negligent cause; March 2024 study resets clock for many
Large plaintiff pool; courts liberal on discovery rule for pharmaceutical latency
Texas
2 years from discovery
Rule: Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003; discovery rule applies
Discovery: Accrues when plaintiff knows or should know of injury and its cause in fact
No statutory repose for pharmaceutical claims; 15-year repose for products liability generally inapplicable to failure-to-warn
Florida
4 years from discovery
Rule: Fla. Stat. § 95.11(3)(a); discovery rule applies via case law
Discovery: Accrues upon discovery of injury and causal connection; longer window than most states
No product liability repose; favorable for latent pharmaceutical injuries
Missouri
5 years from discovery
Rule: Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.120; discovery rule applies for latent injuries
Discovery: Accrues upon discovery of injury and its cause; among longest SOLs nationally
Extended window reduces immediate bar risk; screen for out-of-state defendants for venue
New York
3 years from discovery
Rule: N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 214(5); discovery rule applies for foreign-object and latent disease cases
Discovery: Accrues upon discovery of injury and its cause; continuous treatment doctrine may toll
No statutory repose; favorable discovery jurisprudence for pharmaceutical claims
| State | SOL | Rule | Discovery Rule | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ⚠Louisiana | 1 year from discovery | La. Civ. Code art. 3492; discovery rule applies per March 2024 BMJ study establishing causal link | Clock starts when plaintiff knew or should have known of Depo-Provera-meningioma connection, not diagnosis date alone | Shortest SOL nationwide; pre-2024 diagnoses at acute bar risk without discovery tolling |
| ⚠Kentucky | 1 year from discovery | Ky. Rev. Stat. § 413.140(1)(a); discovery rule recognized for latent injuries | Accrues upon discovery of injury and its cause; March 2024 study triggers new knowledge | One-year window creates immediate intake urgency for any 2024 diagnoses |
| ⚠Tennessee | 1 year from discovery | Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104; discovery rule applies for latent diseases | Accrues when injury is discovered or should have been discovered with reasonable diligence | No product liability repose statute; discovery rule critical for pre-2024 Depo use |
| California | 2 years from discovery | Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 335.1; discovery rule codified at § 338 | Accrues upon discovery of injury and its negligent cause; March 2024 study resets clock for many | Large plaintiff pool; courts liberal on discovery rule for pharmaceutical latency |
| Texas | 2 years from discovery | Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003; discovery rule applies | Accrues when plaintiff knows or should know of injury and its cause in fact | No statutory repose for pharmaceutical claims; 15-year repose for products liability generally inapplicable to failure-to-warn |
| Florida | 4 years from discovery | Fla. Stat. § 95.11(3)(a); discovery rule applies via case law | Accrues upon discovery of injury and causal connection; longer window than most states | No product liability repose; favorable for latent pharmaceutical injuries |
| Missouri | 5 years from discovery | Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.120; discovery rule applies for latent injuries | Accrues upon discovery of injury and its cause; among longest SOLs nationally | Extended window reduces immediate bar risk; screen for out-of-state defendants for venue |
| New York | 3 years from discovery | N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 214(5); discovery rule applies for foreign-object and latent disease cases | Accrues upon discovery of injury and its cause; continuous treatment doctrine may toll | No statutory repose; favorable discovery jurisprudence for pharmaceutical claims |
Live intelligence
AI litigation brief
Depo-Provera remains early-stage / pre-daubert with 361 current signals in the accepted feed.
Overview
MDL No. 3140 in the Northern District of Florida before Judge M. Casey Rodgers held its ninth case management conference December 19, 2025, with Daubert hearings scheduled May 26-28, 2026, and first pilot case trial set December 7, 2026. The court ordered monthly status conferences throughout 2026 and mandated disclosure of pre-settlement litigation funding arrangements.
Key developments
Trajectory
Court filings and press coverage are both active in MDL 3140, pointing to sustained litigation pressure rather than a one-off headline cycle. 6 live sources are contributing current context.
Editorial intelligence
MDL 3140 should stay on the lead docket watch because it is the primary consolidation vehicle for Depo-Provera.
Generated Jun 13, 2026, 9:00 AM UTC
361 events detected
Google News (15)
Pfizer Brought into a Depo-Provera Meningioma Claim in Clark County, WA - EIN News
Women suing Pfizer over 'brain tumour link to contraceptive injection' - Sky News
Nine New Mexico women allege brain tumors from injectable birth control in lawsuit - Santa Fe New Mexican
Depo-Provera Litigation Explained: What Women Should Know About Emerging Brain Tumor Claims - KHTS Radio
Who qualifies for the birth control shot lawsuit and how to check - INQUIRER.net USA
Birth Injury Justice Center Responds to Rapidly Expanding Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Litigation - reflector.com
Pfizer faces 2026 trial as brain tumour claims multiply - ICLG
Legal-Bay Pre Settlement Funding Provides Financial Support for Plaintiffs in Depo-Provera Litigation - PR Newswire
Depo-Provera MDL Sees Massive Influx of Lawsuits, Pfizer Doubles Down on Argument to Dismiss Cases - The Legal Examiner
Depo-Provera Brain Tumor MDL Sees Massive Influx of Cases - The Legal Examiner
Depo-Provera Meningioma Lawsuits: Eight Groups of Women Who May Qualify - JD Supra
Mohr Marketing Launches ‘Medical-First’ Compliance Program for Depo-Provera Meningioma Litigation - The Progress Index
Pfizer Failed To Warn Of Depo-Provera Cancer Risk, Suit Says - Law360
Depo-Provera and Meningioma: What the Latest Research Means for Women Who Used the Birth Control Shot - JD Supra
Mohr Marketing Launches ‘Medical-First’ Compliance Program for Depo-Provera Meningioma Litigation - The Register-Guard
Neuro-oncology • Gardner PA • PMID 42258618 • Journal Article.
Research square • Swaney D • PMID 42282014 • Journal Article.
Neuropathology : official journal of the Japanese Society of Neuropathology • Tsuta K • PMID 42082317 • Case Reports.
Neuro-oncology • Raleigh DR • PMID 42166750 • Journal Article.
Neurosurgery • Gardner PA • PMID 42012174 • Journal Article.
Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket filed in JPML: Plaintiffs are suing Defendants Pfizer Inc., Viatris Inc., Greenstone LLC, Prasco, LLC, Pharmacia & Upjohn Co. LLC, and Pharmacia LLC because of injuries allegedly caused by the drug Depo-Provera. Plaintiff claims that the use of Depo-Provera led to the development of an intracranial meningioma, a t
Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from FLND: COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number AFLNDC-9930353.), filed by KANEKA DANIELLE SCOTT. (GLITZ, JESSICA) (Entered: 06/11/2026)
Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from FLND: COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number AFLNDC-9930310.), filed by TRINA LEE. (GLITZ, JESSICA) (Entered: 06/11/2026)
Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from FLND: COMPLAINT against PFIZER INC, PHARMACIA LLC, PHARMACIA & UPJOHN CO LLC ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number AFLNDC-9930258.), filed by AMANDA MARTEL. (NIGHBERT, HOLLY) (Entered: 06/11/2026)
Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from FLND: COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number AFLNDC-9930224.), filed by SUZANNE MARIE RAMBO. (GLITZ, JESSICA) (Entered: 06/11/2026)
Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from FLND: COMPLAINT against PFIZER INC, PHARMACIA & UPJOHN CO LLC, PHARMACIA LLC ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number AFLNDC-9930128.), filed by TASHINA Y WILLIAMS. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet) (AYLSTOCK, BRYAN) (Entered: 06/11/2026)
Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from FLND: COMPLAINT against PFIZER INC, PHARMACIA & UPJOHN CO LLC, PHARMACIA LLC ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number AFLNDC-9930124.), filed by ERIN WILLIAMS. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet) (AYLSTOCK, BRYAN) (Entered: 06/11/2026)
Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from FLND: COMPLAINT against PFIZER INC, PHARMACIA & UPJOHN CO LLC, PHARMACIA LLC ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number AFLNDC-9930116.), filed by KIMBERLY SMITH. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet) (AYLSTOCK, BRYAN) (Entered: 06/11/2026)
Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from FLND: COMPLAINT against PFIZER INC, PHARMACIA & UPJOHN CO LLC, PHARMACIA LLC ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number AFLNDC-9930108.), filed by LISA MILLIGAN. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet) (AYLSTOCK, BRYAN) (Entered: 06/11/2026)
Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from FLND: COMPLAINT against PFIZER INC, PHARMACIA & UPJOHN CO LLC, PHARMACIA LLC ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number AFLNDC-9930093.), filed by MICKIE F KOROMA. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet) (AYLSTOCK, BRYAN) (Entered: 06/11/2026)
Workbench
Sign in to save litigations, capture notes, and monitor live signals. Sign in for unlimited.
LexGenius Ranking
92Score
Court, news, and regulatory activity are elevated
Monitoring
Live
monitoring
Last: Jun 13, 2026, 9:00 AM UTC
Next: 14:09
Source Monitoring
PACER
PACER
Google News
FAERS
PubMed
Event feed
361
events detected
AI Brief
Depo-Provera remains early-stage / pre-daubert with 361 current signals in the accepted feed.
Overview
MDL No. 3140 in the Northern District of Florida before Judge M. Casey Rodgers held its ninth case management conference December 19, 2025, with Daubert hearings scheduled May 26-28, 2026, and first pilot case trial set December 7, 2026. The court ordered monthly status conferences throughout 2026 and mandated disclosure of pre-settlement litigation funding arrangements.
Key developments
PACER court filing on Dec 31: Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation. ‖ EIN News news on Jun 3: Pfizer Brought into a Depo-Provera Meningioma Claim in Clark County, WA - EIN News. ‖ FAERS FDA alert on Apr 15: FAERS Filing 26561226: Meningioma. ‖ PubMed research on Jun 8: Genomic hallmarks of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate-associated meningiomas..
Generated Jun 13, 2026, 9:00 AM UTC
Tracked MDLs
MDL 3140
N.D. Fla.
Depo-Provera medroxyprogesterone acetate products liability