MDL-3181 Four manufacturers, four situations

Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuits by Manufacturer

Updated August 3, 2026. There is no single spinal cord stimulator lawsuit. The JPML refused to create one industry-wide MDL, so the manufacturer of your device determines which court hears your case and what it faces. This page compares Boston Scientific, Abbott, Nevro, and Medtronic side by side.

Last Updated: August 3, 2026
5 min read
JPML Data Verified
5 sources cited

Key Takeaways

  • One MDL exists: MDL-3181 against Boston Scientific. Abbott and Nevro petitions are pending; Medtronic has none
  • The JPML refused an industry-wide MDL because the manufacturers are not alleged to have acted in concert
  • Abbott holds the only Class I recall; Nevro has no classified recall at all; Medtronic has the most recalls
  • The manufacturer of your device determines which court hears your case
  • There is no verdict and no settlement against any manufacturer

Side-by-side comparison

Manufacturer MDL status Petition Device models FDA recall history Key ruling
Boston Scientific MDL-3181 (C.D. Cal., Judge Staton) Already centralized WaveWriter, WaveWriter Alpha, Precision Montage, Spectra WaveWriter No Class I SCS recall identified Sales-rep theory pleaded in every complaint; first MDL preemption ruling awaited
Abbott (St. Jude) None yet Pending (filed June 2026) Proclaim XR, Proclaim Plus, Proclaim DRG, Eterna Only Class I SCS recall of any maker (July 2023, 155,028 devices); Class II in 2024 and 2025 Earlier centralization denial was a Section 1407 technicality, not a merits ruling
Nevro (with Globus Medical) None yet Pending (filed June 2026) Senza, Senza II, Senza Omnia, HFX iQ No FDA-classified recall on record; 2,478 MAUDE reports (Jan 2024 to Jul 2026) DiToto (plaintiff-favorable, May 2026) vs Yusnukis and Greene (dismissed)
Medtronic None None Intellis, Vanta, Inceptiv, Restore Highest recall count (19 events / 23 product records since 2020); no Class I claimed Schiltz order (July 14, 2026), the most consequential SCS ruling to date

Device lists are drawn from manufacturer product lines and reporting, not from a court exhibit; the JPML transfer order names no specific models. Recall and MAUDE figures are from FDA databases. There is no verdict or settlement in the tort.

Why the split matters

The single most misreported fact in this tort is that there is one spinal cord stimulator lawsuit. There is not. When the JPML created MDL-3181 on June 5, 2026, it centralized only the Boston Scientific cases and expressly declined to create an industry-wide MDL, reasoning that the plaintiffs do not allege the manufacturers acted in concert and that each device line has its own regulatory history. The result is four different procedural situations, summarized above, and the practical consequence is that the manufacturer of your device decides where your case goes.

One fact applies across all four: the filing deadline. The July 14, 2026 Schiltz order applied one-year state limitations periods and started the clock when a patient was advised to turn the device off or developed dramatic new symptoms, not at explant. That analysis will not apply in every state, but it makes the timeline more urgent than the two-to-four-year windows advertised on many firm pages, regardless of manufacturer.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which spinal cord stimulator lawsuits exist?
There is one federal spinal cord stimulator MDL: MDL-3181 against Boston Scientific, before Judge Staton in the Central District of California. Centralization petitions against Abbott and Nevro are pending. Medtronic has no MDL and no pending petition. The JPML expressly declined to create a single industry-wide spinal cord stimulator MDL covering all manufacturers.
Why isn’t there one MDL for all spinal cord stimulator manufacturers?
Plaintiffs asked the JPML for a single industry-wide MDL, and the Panel refused. Its reasoning was that although plaintiffs allege similar conduct by each manufacturer, they do not allege the manufacturers acted in concert. Each manufacturer has its own device line and its own regulatory history, so discovery would not overlap, and the Panel is generally hesitant to centralize litigation against competing defendants that marketed similar products.
Does the manufacturer determine where my case goes?
Yes. Because there is no single spinal cord stimulator case to join, the manufacturer of your device determines which court hears your case and what procedural posture it faces. A Boston Scientific case belongs to MDL-3181 in California; Abbott and Nevro cases proceed individually unless and until their petitions are granted; Medtronic cases proceed individually with no petition pending.
Have there been any settlements or verdicts against any manufacturer?
No. There has never been a jury verdict or a settlement against Boston Scientific, Abbott, Nevro, Globus Medical, or Medtronic in spinal cord stimulator product liability litigation. Any specific settlement figure or average circulating online is a projection with no verifiable source, and we do not publish such figures.

Sources & References

5 sources cited

• JPML transfer order creating MDL-3181 (June 5, 2026) and the denial of an industry-wide MDL

• FDA Medical Device Recall Database and MAUDE Database for each manufacturer

• DiToto v. Nevro (D. Md., May 2026); Yusnukis and Greene dismissals

• Schiltz order, District of Minnesota (July 14, 2026)

• Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation: August 2026 MDL statistics

Attorney Advertising. The information on this page is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is created by accessing or using this content.

Every case is unique, and results depend on the specific facts and circumstances involved. Past settlement amounts and case outcomes do not guarantee similar results in your case. If you believe you have a legal claim, you should consult with a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction who can evaluate your specific situation.

Read our full disclaimer · Privacy Policy · Terms of Use