A new Mirena IUD lawsuit has joined the massive legal action against Bayer over allegations that this form of birth control is dangerous.

The Mirena IUD is a birth control implant designed to be inserted into the uterus by a doctor. Once in place, the Mirena IUD is designed to remain in place for up to five years, blocking pregnancy. However, there have been reports—and lawsuits—alleging that the Mirena IUD is dangerous and can cause serious medical problems.

According to her Mirena IUD lawsuit, Plaintiff Tierra H. of Ohio received the IUD in 2012 when she was about 26 years old. The insertion was normal, as was the recommended follow-up appointment, her lawsuit says. However, six months after the implantation, she began to experience severe cramping and pain. After emergency medical care, her physicians realized she was suffering from a retained IUD, and required surgical intervention.

Tierra’s Mirena lawsuit is joining others in a type of coordinated legal action called Multidistrict Litigation or MDL. In MDLs, the court system group similar individual lawsuits into a single coordinated legal action.

More than 1,300 individual Mirena lawsuits have been coordinated in a New York District Court. Group legal actions like the Mirena MDL are designed to help streamline the legal process by avoiding duplication of efforts. Precedents established in the earlier cases in the MDL can be applied to other cases, cutting down on court time for all involved.

The various lawsuits in the Mirena MDL have made a number of similar allegations. These generally include allegations that the Mirena IUD is unsafe. Some individual Mirena lawsuits in the Mirena MDL have alleged that Mirena can cause complications such perforation and migration. In perforation and migration, the Mirena IUD punctures through the wall of the uterus and moves around inside the body.

On top of this, many Mirena lawsuits allege that Bayer, the manufacturer of Mirena, aggressively marketed the device, exaggerating benefits and downplaying the risks associated with Mirena. To support these allegations, Mirena lawsuits have cited a 2009 warning letter, sent by the FDA that warned Bayer they were exaggerating the benefits of Mirena and downplaying the risks in the device’s marking materials.

Mirena IUD lawsuits typically seek to recoup costs allegedly linked to Mirena complications. This may include medical costs, lost wages, legal fees, and compensation for pain and suffering.

The Mirena MDL is In Re: Mirena IUD Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2434, in the Southern District of New York.