MDL Track
MDL 2974
N.D. Ga.
Paragard IUD products liability
3,926 pending
Medical Device · claims that copper IUD arms fractured during removal and caused complications
Defendant
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
MDL / Track
MDL 2974
N.D. Ga.
Judge
Judge Leigh Martin May
Plaintiffs
roughly 3,966 pending (3,926 per JPML's March 2, 2026 report, plus ~40 new filings tracked since)
Bellwether / Trial
Defense verdict for Teva (Feb. 4, 2026, Rickard v. Teva)
Settlement Status
Track litigations for free. Save this matter, capture notes, and monitor live signals.
Case overview
The Paragard IUD MDL (No. 2974, N.D. Ga., Judge Leigh Martin May) remains in active bellwether posture after the first trial ended in a defense verdict for Teva on February 4, 2026. The court postponed remaining bellwether trials to later in 2026 following that verdict; over 4,000 cases are pending with no global settlement reached. Plaintiffs allege the copper IUD's polyethylene arms become brittle during implantation and fracture during standard removal, leaving embedded fragments requiring surgical retrieval.
Causation Theory
Plaintiffs' causation theory centers on polyethylene arm embrittlement: the plastic frame loses flexibility over years of implantation, causing fracture when traction is applied during removal rather than flexing back into the device body. The FDA received over 7,000 adverse event reports of Paragard breakage, with more than 700 incidents reported in the first half of 2024 alone. A 2021 FDA safety review acknowledged that retained fragments carry "unknown consequences" and that breakage "can subject patients to risk and cause anxiety," resulting only in a June 2024 label update directing providers to assess for embedment and consider imaging when gentle removal fails.
Case Management Orders
Litigation status
MDL 2974 remains in active bellwether posture before Judge Leigh Martin May in the Northern District of Georgia. The first bellwether trial ended in a defense verdict for Teva on February 4, 2026 (Rickard v. Teva); remaining bellwethers were postponed to fall 2026 to allow parties to absorb the trial record and complete expert discovery. Case management orders govern Plaintiff Fact Sheet and Defendant Fact Sheet obligations.
MDL Track
MDL 2974
N.D. Ga.
Paragard IUD products liability
3,926 pending
State Court Activity
State court filings continue in NY, CA, IL and other jurisdictions
MDL 2974 Leadership
Plaintiff Leadership
Co-Lead Counsel
Liaison Counsel
Geographic exposure
Approximately 3,595-3,926 cases pending in MDL 2974 as of mid-2026. FDA MAUDE database contains 7,000+ breakage adverse events with 6,000 serious classifications. Device on market since 1984; Teva manufactured 1984-November 2017, CooperSurgical 2017-present. Both manufacturers named in most complaints. No global settlement reached; first bellwether trial (Feb. 2026) returned defense verdict; second bellwether rescheduled fall 2026.
CooperSurgical manufacturing facility — sole Paragard production site since November 2017 acquisition from Teva. FDA 2022 and 2024 inspections found failures to 'adequately investigate breakage complaints' and inadequate corrective action plans; seven of 11 CAPAs remained deficient as of 2024 inspection. Source: Spotlight on America analysis of FDA inspection records (Aug. 2024).
Statute-of-limitations dismissals: Judge Leigh Martin May ruled SOL clock starts at IUD breakage moment, not later complications. 2025 ruling dismissed cases from Alabama, Idaho, Michigan, Mississippi, New York, Virginia on this basis. Source: MDL 2974 case management orders, N.D. Ga.
SOL dismissal state — Judge May 2025 ruling held injury occurs at breakage, not discovery. Source: MDL 2974 case management orders, N.D. Ga.
SOL dismissal state — 2025 ruling held breakage moment triggers clock. Source: MDL 2974 case management orders, N.D. Ga.
SOL dismissal state — 2025 ruling. Source: MDL 2974 case management orders, N.D. Ga.
SOL dismissal state per 2025 ruling. Original Teva manufacturing site location (Buffalo facility). Source: MDL 2974 case management orders, N.D. Ga.; FDA inspection records.
SOL dismissal state — 2025 ruling held breakage moment triggers clock. Source: MDL 2974 case management orders, N.D. Ga.
SOL survival state — plaintiffs successfully argued concealment extended deadline. MDL 2974 venue (N.D. Ga., Judge Leigh Martin May). Direct filing order active. Source: MDL 2974 administrative orders.
SOL survival state — concealment arguments accepted by MDL court. Source: MDL 2974 case management orders.
SOL survival state — concealment arguments accepted. Source: MDL 2974 case management orders.
Key defendants
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
Role: Manufacturer
Core defendant in MDL 2974. Filed motion to dismiss 236 time-barred cases Sept. 2024; actively contesting statute of limitations/repose. Parent Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. disclosed July 2023.
CooperSurgical, Inc.
Role: Manufacturer
Co-defendant with Teva. Joined dismissal motion targeting stale claims. Corporate parent The Cooper Companies, Inc. disclosed. Withdrawal of opposition to CTO-58 filed Aug. 2023.
Teva Women's Health, LLC
Role: Manufacturer
Named in master complaint; successor to Teva Women's Health, Inc. (terminated from docket April 2021). Active in bellwether discovery per Oct. 2024 orders.
| Defendant | Role | Intelligence Note |
|---|---|---|
| Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. | Manufacturer | Core defendant in MDL 2974. Filed motion to dismiss 236 time-barred cases Sept. 2024; actively contesting statute of limitations/repose. Parent Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. disclosed July 2023. |
| CooperSurgical, Inc. | Manufacturer | Co-defendant with Teva. Joined dismissal motion targeting stale claims. Corporate parent The Cooper Companies, Inc. disclosed. Withdrawal of opposition to CTO-58 filed Aug. 2023. |
| Teva Women's Health, LLC | Manufacturer | Named in master complaint; successor to Teva Women's Health, Inc. (terminated from docket April 2021). Active in bellwether discovery per Oct. 2024 orders. |
Timeline
Second Bellwether Rescheduled to Fall 2026
MDL 2974 Judge Leigh Martin May postpones second bellwether trial to Fall 2026 following defense verdict in first trial. MDL contains 3,982 active cases. Richard v. CooperSurgical, MDL 2974, N.D. Ga.
First Bellwether Ends in Defense Verdict
Jury returns defense verdict in Richard v. CooperSurgical, first MDL 2974 bellwether trial. Jury found Paragard design not defective and injuries not caused by device. Trial began January 20, 2026. MDL 2974, N.D. Ga.
Bellwether Trial Order Finalized
Judge May issues final bellwether trial order setting Richard v. CooperSurgical for January 20, 2026. Second and third bellwethers initially scheduled for March 3 and May 11, 2026. MDL 2974, N.D. Ga.
Court Sets Key Litigation Deadlines
Judge May establishes deadlines for expert discovery and dispositive motions ahead of bellwether trials. MDL 2974 case count approaches 3,500. N.D. Ga.
Study Shows Elevated Breakage Risk
Medical study published October 31, 2022 documents higher Paragard breakage risk during removal. Study cited in MDL 2974 complaints as scientific basis for design defect claims.
FDA Initiates IUD Safety Review
FDA initiates safety review of IUD breakage following volume of adverse event reports. Review results in 2019 label update warning of arm breakage risk. No recall issued. FDA regulatory action.
MDL 2974 Created for Paragard Cases
Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidates federal Paragard cases in MDL 2974 before Judge Leigh Martin May in Northern District of Georgia. JPML Transfer Order.
CooperSurgical Acquires Paragard
CooperSurgical purchases Paragard from Teva Pharmaceuticals, becoming co-defendant in subsequent litigation. Ownership transfer completed September 11, 2017.
Statute of limitations
MDL 2974 (In re: Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation), Judge Leigh Martin May, N.D. Ga. Defendants' Sept. 12, 2024 motion seeks dismissal of 236 cases across 11 states, arguing accrual at device fracture/removal—not subsequent injury discovery. First bellwether trial reset to Jan. 20, 2026 per sources. Intake must prioritize: (1) exact removal/fracture date over symptom onset; (2) state of filing vs. state of injury. No global settlement per sources; individual case viability increasingly SOL-dependent.
⚠Alabama
2 years from injury
Rule: Accrual tied to removal surgery date per defendants' Sept. 2024 motion; discovery rule disputed
Discovery: Defendants arguing clock starts at fracture/removal, not later discovery of injury
Among 11 states in Sept. 12, 2024 MDL 2974 dismissal motion targeting 236 cases; motion status unclear from sources
⚠Michigan
3 years from injury
Rule: Product liability claims; defendants arguing device fracture constitutes injury triggering accrual
Discovery: Statutory discovery rule exists but actively contested in MDL
Targeted in Sept. 2024 MDL dismissal motion; intake must screen for removal/fracture date
⚠New York
3 years from injury
Rule: Courts apply discovery rule but defendants challenging in MDL 2974
Discovery: Under active litigation; defendants asserting fracture date controls
Included in 236-case dismissal motion; risk of dismissal if filed more than 3 years post-removal/fracture
⚠Texas
2 years from injury
Rule: Product liability accrual at injury occurrence; defendants arguing strict accrual at fracture/removal
Discovery: Defendants pressing removal-date accrual in pending motion
Among 11 states in Sept. 2024 MDL dismissal motion; 2-year window creates elevated urgency
⚠Tennessee
1 year from injury
Rule: Shortest SOL among active MDL states; defendants pressing removal-date accrual
Discovery: Minimal; statutory discovery provision contested
1-year SOL plus inclusion in dismissal motion creates highest intake risk; cases likely time-barred if removal >1 year ago
⚠North Carolina
3 years from injury
Rule: Product liability with discovery rule; defendants arguing fracture date triggers accrual
Discovery: Contested in MDL 2974
Targeted in Sept. 2024 dismissal motion; screen for removal/fracture date
⚠Georgia
2 years from injury
Rule: MDL venue state with active SOL challenges; defendants asserting removal surgery date controls
Discovery: Discovery rule disputed in pending motion
MDL 2974 situs (N.D. Ga., Judge Leigh Martin May); dismissal motion includes Georgia cases
| State | SOL | Rule | Discovery Rule | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ⚠Alabama | 2 years from injury | Accrual tied to removal surgery date per defendants' Sept. 2024 motion; discovery rule disputed | Defendants arguing clock starts at fracture/removal, not later discovery of injury | Among 11 states in Sept. 12, 2024 MDL 2974 dismissal motion targeting 236 cases; motion status unclear from sources |
| ⚠Michigan | 3 years from injury | Product liability claims; defendants arguing device fracture constitutes injury triggering accrual | Statutory discovery rule exists but actively contested in MDL | Targeted in Sept. 2024 MDL dismissal motion; intake must screen for removal/fracture date |
| ⚠New York | 3 years from injury | Courts apply discovery rule but defendants challenging in MDL 2974 | Under active litigation; defendants asserting fracture date controls | Included in 236-case dismissal motion; risk of dismissal if filed more than 3 years post-removal/fracture |
| ⚠Texas | 2 years from injury | Product liability accrual at injury occurrence; defendants arguing strict accrual at fracture/removal | Defendants pressing removal-date accrual in pending motion | Among 11 states in Sept. 2024 MDL dismissal motion; 2-year window creates elevated urgency |
| ⚠Tennessee | 1 year from injury | Shortest SOL among active MDL states; defendants pressing removal-date accrual | Minimal; statutory discovery provision contested | 1-year SOL plus inclusion in dismissal motion creates highest intake risk; cases likely time-barred if removal >1 year ago |
| ⚠North Carolina | 3 years from injury | Product liability with discovery rule; defendants arguing fracture date triggers accrual | Contested in MDL 2974 | Targeted in Sept. 2024 dismissal motion; screen for removal/fracture date |
| ⚠Georgia | 2 years from injury | MDL venue state with active SOL challenges; defendants asserting removal surgery date controls | Discovery rule disputed in pending motion | MDL 2974 situs (N.D. Ga., Judge Leigh Martin May); dismissal motion includes Georgia cases |
Live intelligence
AI litigation brief
Paragard remains active mdl with 17 current signals in the accepted feed.
Overview
MDL 2974 remains in active bellwether posture before Judge Leigh Martin May in the Northern District of Georgia. The first bellwether trial ended in a defense verdict for Teva on February 4, 2026 (Rickard v. Teva); remaining bellwethers were postponed to fall 2026 to allow parties to absorb the trial record and complete expert discovery. Case management orders govern Plaintiff Fact Sheet and Defendant Fact Sheet obligations.
Key developments
Trajectory
Court filings and press coverage are both active in MDL 2974, pointing to sustained litigation pressure rather than a one-off headline cycle. 6 live sources are contributing current context.
Editorial intelligence
MDL 2974 should stay on the lead docket watch because it is the primary consolidation vehicle for Paragard.
Generated Aug 12, 2026, 2:00 AM UTC
17 events detected
Google News (10)
Hysteroscopic Retrieval of Retained and Fractured Copper Intrauterine Devices: A Case Series of Three Patients and Literature Review - Cureus
Paragard IUD MDL Judge Trims Claims For 2nd Bellwether Plaintiff - Mealey's
IUD Lawsuit 2026: Settlement Amounts & Who Qualifies - LawFold.com
After First Paragard IUD Bellwether Trial, Georgia Judge Considers Revising Bellwether Plan - Law.com
Teva Wins Jury Verdict in First Paragard IUD Bellwether Trial - Bloomberg Law News
Teva Wins 1st Paragard IUD Bellwether Trial - Law360
Teva prevails in first U.S. jury trial over Paragard IUD injury claims - Reuters
Teva's Inconsistent Args In IUD Trial 'Troubling,' Judge Says - Law360
What Happens if an IUD Breaks? - The Cut
What Happens if an IUD Breaks? - The Cut
Cureus • Poventud Y • PMID 42266549 • Case Reports.
No recent FDA signals. Monitoring is active — this section updates automatically.
Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket filed in JPML: The plaintiffs are suing a group of pharmaceutical and medical device companies over the ParaGard Intrauterine Device (IUD), which they claim is prone to breaking during removal, often at the arms, causing severe injuries that sometimes require surgical removal of the fragments. They allege that the
Plaintiff Fact Sheet — MDL No. 2974
This document is a Plaintiff Fact Sheet (PFS) for the Paragard IUD MDL, requiring each plaintiff to complete it under oath with true and correct information.
Defendant Fact Sheet — Paragard IUD MDL
gand_html
This document is a Defendant Fact Sheet (DFS) template for the Paragard IUD MDL, requiring defendants to complete and serve it under oath per Case Management Order requirements.
Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from GAND: COMPLAINT with Jury Demand filed by Desiree Martinez. (Filing fee $405, receipt number AGANDC-15431170) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(mrg) Please visit our website at http://www.gand.uscourts.gov/commonly-used-forms to obtain Pretrial Instructions and Pretrial Associated Forms which includes
Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from GAND: SHORT FROM COMPLAINT with Jury Demand filed by Andrea Edman. Direct File MDL-USDC Southern District of New York (Filing fee $405, receipt number AGANDC-15400480) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(bmr) Please visit our website at http://www.gand.uscourts.gov/commonly-used-forms to obtain Pretrial
Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation
PACER docket entry from GAND: COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-41546820 - Fee: $405, filed by plaintiff Leah Pepper. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet) (Attorney Conor R Nideffer added to party Leah Pepper(pty:pla))(Nideffer, Conor) [Transferred from California Central on 7/17/2026.] (Entered: 02/19/2026)
Audit normalization notes
Workbench
Sign in to save litigations, capture notes, and monitor live signals. Sign in for unlimited.
LexGenius Ranking
88Score
Court, news, and regulatory activity are elevated
Monitoring
Live
monitoring
Last: Aug 12, 2026, 2:00 AM UTC
Next: —
Source Monitoring
PACER
PACER
Google News
MAUDE
PubMed
Event feed
17
events detected
AI Brief
Paragard remains active mdl with 17 current signals in the accepted feed.
Overview
MDL 2974 remains in active bellwether posture before Judge Leigh Martin May in the Northern District of Georgia. The first bellwether trial ended in a defense verdict for Teva on February 4, 2026 (Rickard v. Teva); remaining bellwethers were postponed to fall 2026 to allow parties to absorb the trial record and complete expert discovery. Case management orders govern Plaintiff Fact Sheet and Defendant Fact Sheet obligations.
Key developments
PACER court filing on Dec 31: Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation. ‖ Cureus news on Jul 17: Hysteroscopic Retrieval of Retained and Fractured Copper Intrauterine Devices: A Case Series of Three Patients and Literature Review - Cureus. ‖ PubMed research on Jun 8: Uterine Perforation With Extrauterine Intrauterine Device (IUD) Migration Following Blunt Abdominal Trauma: A Case Report..
Generated Aug 12, 2026, 2:00 AM UTC
Tracked MDLs
MDL 2974
N.D. Ga.
Paragard IUD products liability