Paragard IUD Lawsuit: Where MDL Cases Stand (2026)

Where the Case Stands in 2026

The Paragard lawsuit is still very much active. As of September 1, 2026, 4,185 cases were pending in MDL No. 2974, and 4,503 had been filed since the litigation began. Most of the women involved are still waiting for any result in their own case.

The next federal jury will not hear a Paragard case until spring 2027. In July 2026, Judge Leigh Martin May set the second bellwether trial to begin on April 12, 2027. Teva's July filing also listed a separate New Jersey state-court case, outside the federal MDL, for trial on September 14, 2026. No result from that trial had appeared in the court or company records we reviewed at the time of writing.

Two other issues hang over every pending claim. Judge May has asked the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to settle a legal question that could decide whether many warning claims survive. And no settlement has been announced. Teva's most recent quarterly filing describes the Paragard cases only as ongoing litigation.

What the Lawsuit Is About and Why Women Filed

Paragard is a small, T-shaped plastic device with copper that a doctor places in the uterus. It contains no hormones. The FDA-approved prescribing label allows it to stay in place for up to 10 years to prevent pregnancy.

The problem women describe comes when the device is taken out. The lawsuits claim Paragard can break during removal and leave a piece inside the body. The injuries alleged include surgeries to remove the broken piece of the device, infertility, and pain. Plaintiffs raise two main claims: the companies did not warn clearly enough about the risk, and the design itself was defective.

The current label acknowledges the risk. It states that breakage may be associated with removal and tells doctors to make sure the device is intact once it is out.

Outside research points the same way. A 2023 study in the journal Contraception counted 4,144 breakage reports for copper IUDs in the FDA's adverse event database, compared with 2,140 for hormonal IUDs. Breaks made up 9.6% of copper IUD reports but only 1.7% of hormonal ones. The authors noted that this kind of data cannot show how often breaks truly happen.

Who the Defendants Are

The cases name two groups of companies. The first is Teva: Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Teva Women's Health, Inc., Teva Women's Health, LLC, and Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D. The second is The Cooper Companies and its unit CooperSurgical.

Teva's women's health unit held the FDA approval to sell Paragard from 1995 until August 2017. CooperSurgical took it over on November 2, 2017. That split matters, because which company sold the device at the time may shape who a claim is brought against.

How the Federal MDL and Bellwether Trials Work

Federal cases are grouped in MDL No. 2974, In re: Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation, before Judge May in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The court keeps a public page for the MDL with its orders. An MDL, or multidistrict litigation, sends similar federal cases to one judge for shared pretrial work. Each woman still keeps her own lawsuit, so this is not a class action.

Bellwether trials are early test cases. Their verdicts do not bind other plaintiffs, but they show both sides how juries react to the evidence. The first Paragard bellwether, brought by Pauline Rickard, began on January 20, 2026. It ended on February 3 with a verdict for Teva, as the jury rejected her warning and design claims.

The court has since changed how future test cases are picked. Under a June 16, 2026 order, plaintiffs must choose four cases tied to the years Teva owned Paragard and four tied to the years after Cooper acquired it. Each side gets limited vetoes. As a result, later trials should test claims against both companies, not only Teva.

The Label-Law Fight That Could Shape Every Case

Teva's main legal defense is called preemption. In plain terms, Teva argues that federal drug rules stopped it from changing Paragard's warning on its own, so state-law claims that it should have warned better cannot go forward. Although Paragard is a device, the FDA regulates it as a drug, which is why these rules apply.

An FDA rule known as "changes being effected" lets a company strengthen a label before the agency signs off, but only based on "newly acquired information." The fight is over what counts as new information and when a company can rely on it.

In December 2025, Judge May partly granted and partly denied Teva's request to end claims on this basis. Enough survived for the first trial to go ahead. On January 12, 2026, she refused to let Teva appeal right away, finding it would not speed up the end of the litigation.

After Teva asked again, she formally sent a revised version of the question to the 11th Circuit in June 2026. The appeals court's answer could decide whether many failure-to-warn claims live or die. Then, on July 2, 2026, she trimmed some claims of the woman next in line for a bellwether trial.

Settlements: None Yet, and What Could Come Next

There is no Paragard settlement. No global deal has been announced, and no fund exists for claimants. The only jury verdict so far went to Teva.

In our view, three events could move the cases toward a deal: the April 2027 bellwether trial, later trials involving Cooper-era devices, and the 11th Circuit's answer on the label question. A plaintiff win could push the companies to negotiate. Another defense win, or an appeals ruling that favors Teva, could shrink the number of viable claims. If a deal does come, we would expect it to weigh how serious each woman's injury was.

Who May Qualify for a Claim

The women in this MDL share one core fact: their Paragard broke while it was still inside the body. Most claims involve a break during removal that left a fragment behind.

Generally speaking, a person may want to speak with a lawyer if a piece stayed inside after removal, if they needed imaging or another procedure to find or remove it, or if they suffered lasting harm such as ongoing pain or fertility problems. Because doctors are told to confirm the device is intact once it is out, the removal note is often a key record.

Records That Can Support a Claim

• Records showing when and where Paragard was placed
• The removal note describing the break or missing piece
• Ultrasound, X-ray, or other imaging used to find a fragment
• Reports from any follow-up procedure or surgery
• Records of later pain, infection, or fertility treatment
• Medical bills and proof of lost income

Filing Deadlines

Each state sets its own deadline to sue, called a statute of limitations. Some states also have a statute of repose, a fixed outer limit that can bar a claim even if the injury was found later. These rules have already mattered here. The defendants asked the court to throw out a couple of hundred cases they said were filed too late. In February 2025, Judge May granted that request in part, denied it in part, and set some issues aside for later rulings.

Because the clock may start at removal or when a fragment is discovered, timing can be critical. Anyone considering a claim may want to talk to a lawyer soon.

Get Matched With a Paragard Lawyer

A broken IUD that led to extra treatment may give you grounds for a claim, and state deadlines keep running. It may be worth learning your options now. ConsumerShield matches you directly with experienced local lawyers who specialize in cases like yours.