By Jessy Edwards  |  September 23, 2024

Category: Legal News
paragard, copper iud, and class action
(Photo Credit: Cineberg/Shutterstock)

Update: 

  • Paragard makers and distributors asked a Georgia federal judge to trim hundreds of cases from a multidistrict litigation alleging the copper IUD broke inside patients’ bodies without warning. 
  • On Sept. 12, Teva Pharmaceuticals and The Cooper Cos. filed a motion arguing 210 short-form complaints in the MDL are “clearly untimely” under the relevant statutes of limitation in each state and another 26 complaints are missing information necessary to determine whether they are time-barred.
  • “To promote the efficient administration of this MDL, these cases should be dismissed from the MDL without delay,” lawyers for the companies wrote.
  • The plaintiffs claim Teva and Cooper sold their copper IUD despite knowing about the risks for breakage upon removal.

Paragard copper IUD class action lawsuit overview:

  • Who: Consumers who used the Paragard birth control devices are suing Teva Pharmaceuticals and The Cooper Companies.
  • Why: The consumers allege in consolidated litigation that the Paragard devices broke inside their bodies without warning and despite assurances that the birth control method was safe.
  • Where: The multidistrict litigation (MDL) represents customers nationwide.

(Nov. 19, 2021)

Paragard makers and distributors must face a series of consolidated class action lawsuits claiming that the copper IUD broke inside patients’ bodies without warning, under a new ruling by a Georgia federal judge.

On Nov. 16, US District Judge Leigh Martin May filed an order ruling that multidistrict litigation (MDL) lodged by consumers against Teva Pharmaceuticals (Teva) and The Cooper Companies’ (Cooper) would not be ended right now by the defendants’ motion to dismiss. 

The plaintiffs claim that Teva and Cooper sold their copper IUD despite knowing about the risks for breakage upon removal.

For example, plaintiff Demonica H. filed a Paragard lawsuit in November, claiming the copper IUD has “a propensity to break at the arms upon explant resulting in serious injuries.” 

According to Demonica, former Paragard manufacturer Teva Pharmaceuticals failed to ensure that their product was safe and free of defects, as did Cooper, the company which purchased the IUD in 2017.

Demonica says she had the Paragard IUD implanted in July 2017, believing that the device would offer her reversible birth control. 

In November 2018, Demonica went to the doctor to have the device removed. When her doctor attempted to remove the device, the Paragard copper IUD allegedly broke into various pieces which had to be removed separately.

This incident has caused Demonica significant injury, her lawsuit claims. According to the woman’s allegations, she has suffered from bodily and mental injuries, pain and suffering, loss of reproductive health, and financial injury due to past and future medical expenses.

Paragard copper IUD lawsuits consolidated, get green light

The US Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated more than 100 cases and transferred them to Judge May in December, Law360 reports. In September, Teva and Cooper moved to have the complaint dismissed. 

They argued that the allegations hadn’t been clearly delineated between the companies. They also argued that the complaint failed to state a claim for defective design or manufacture.

However, Judge May disagreed, saying the complaint provides factual underpinnings for design defect claims, for example, the use of plastic T-shaped units that do not have enough flexibility.

She says there are also clear allegations about alleged deviation from manufacturing practices, and that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s requirements support a manufacturing defect claim.

The plaintiffs are represented by Erin K. Copeland of Fibich Leebron Copeland & Briggs, Timothy Clark of Sanders Phillips Grossman LLC, and C. Andrew Childers of Childers Schlueter & Smith LLC.

The Paragard Copper IUD MDL is In Re: Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation, Case No. 1:20-md-02974, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.


Don’t Miss Out!

Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!


Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

We tell you about cash you can claim EVERY WEEK! Sign up for our free newsletter.

5 thoughts onParagard IUD makers claim 236 lawsuits passed statute of limitations

  1. Alicia k Olson says:

    How can I be added to this? My paraguard became embedded in my uterus and had to be surgically removed, but one arm of the T was never found after removal.

  2. Shacora Dudley says:

    Please add me

  3. Barbara Louise Rogers says:

    please add me

  4. BARBARA L ROGERS says:

    Please add me

    1. Ngina Williams says:

      So are you all saying these IUD’S need to be removed

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. By submitting your comment and contact information, you agree to receive marketing emails from Top Class Actions regarding this and/or similar lawsuits or settlements, and/or to be contacted by an attorney or law firm to discuss the details of your potential case at no charge to you if you qualify. Required fields are marked *

Please note: Top Class Actions is not a settlement administrator or law firm. Top Class Actions is a legal news source that reports on class action lawsuits, class action settlements, drug injury lawsuits and product liability lawsuits. Top Class Actions does not process claims and we cannot advise you on the status of any class action settlement claim. You must contact the settlement administrator or your attorney for any updates regarding your claim status, claim form or questions about when payments are expected to be mailed out.