Statute of Limitations for Mirena IUD Lawsuits Being Considered

Judge hears arguments for setting a stricter statute of limitations for Mirena IUD lawsuits.

The judge overseeing multidistrict litigation against Bayer, the manufacturer of the Mirena IUD, is currently addressing a critical issue that could lead to the dismissal of dozens of lawsuits against birth control company.

The Mirena IUD is a type of birth control device, designed to be implanted in a woman’s uterus by a trained physician. Hundreds of Mirena lawsuits pending in an MDL against Bayer allege that these devices are dangerous, and could damage a woman’s internal organs after spontaneously migrating. Lawsuits in the Mirena MDL further allege that Bayer knew about these risks, yet failed to warn patients about the dangers associated with their birth control implant.

An MDL is a type of group lawsuit, similar to a class action suit, where many individual lawsuits are combined into a single court. Over 340 individual Mirena IUD lawsuits are included in the MDL against Bayer.

The critical issue at hand has to do with the statute of limitations for Mirena lawsuits. Under U.S. law, many types of allegations have a built-in time limit on how long a person can wait to seek civil redress, which is typically two years after an injury occurs. Bayer filed a letter on Jan. 15, 2014, alleging that about 70 Mirena lawsuits may have been filed beyond the statute of limitations. Bayer states that many of these cases’ statues of limitation started when the patient first discovered their injuries. The letters goes hand-in-hand with a motion to dismiss these lawsuits.

Legal counsel for the plaintiffs have retorted with a letter of their own. Their letter insists that the “timer” for the Mirena statutes of limitations should start not when the patient first discovered their injuries, but when the patients first discovered that Bayer’s alleged actions caused their injuries. The response holds that “Bayer’s fraudulent concealment” kept patients from realizing that Bayer was responsible for their injuries. The plaintiffs’ council argues that this means the Mirena statute of limitations should have started the moment patients realized that their injuries were possibly the result of Bayer’s actions. Within the letter, the legal counsel argues that the precedents cited by Bayer’s defense team do not take this into account.

The court scheduled a meeting on Jan. 22 to begin to discuss the issues raised by these concerns and Bayer’s motion to dismiss. In at least some of the cases making up the Mirena MDL, lower courts have ruled that patients were not necessarily aware that Bayer could be at fault, effectively overturning Bayer’s motion to dismiss.

The MDL against Bayer is In Re: Mirena IUD Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2434, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

File a Mirena IUD Lawsuit Today

Time may be running out to file a Mirena IUD lawsuit. If you or a loved one had a Mirena IUD inserted after January 1, 2000 or later and had to have surgery – or will be required to have surgery – to have it remove because it migrated, you may be eligible to take legal action against the manufacturer. Filing a Mirena IUD lawsuit may help you recover compensation for medical bills, pain and suffering and other damages. See if you qualify by filling out the short form at the Mirena IUD Injury Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation.