Paragard IUD MDL: First Bellwether Ends in Defense Verdict
The Paragard IUD litigation has reached its first jury verdict — and it went to the defense. In early 2026 a federal jury declined to hold Teva liable in the first bellwether trial, though the case was a defense-selected one, which limits how much it signals about the broader docket.
Key Takeaways
- The first federal bellwether ended in a defense verdict in early 2026; the jury declined to hold Teva liable
- The case was reported to be a defense-selected case, which limits how much it signals about the rest of the docket
- Additional bellwether trials were scheduled through 2026
- Teva has pursued an interlocutory appeal on a federal-preemption question
- About 4,000 cases are pending; claims allege the copper IUD can break on removal, requiring surgery
A first verdict for the defense
The first bellwether in MDL-2974, before Judge Leigh Martin May, went to trial in early 2026 and ended with a defense verdict — the jury rejected the design-defect and failure-to-warn theories in that case. Because it was a defense-selected case, it is a limited read on the overall litigation, and additional bellwethers were scheduled through 2026 to give both sides a fuller picture. Teva has also pursued an interlocutory appeal on a federal-preemption question.
The underlying claims allege that the Paragard copper IUD is prone to breaking on removal, sometimes leaving fragments and requiring surgery. A 2019 FDA-mandated label update warns of breakage on removal; there has been no recall. This is general litigation reporting; the verdict and procedural details are attributed to the sources below.
Full Paragard MDL background & eligibility
For the complete overview — the device, the science, and how cases proceed — visit our case hub.
Sources
- • Reuters, "Teva can't delay first trial over Paragard IUDs with appeal" (Jan 12, 2026) and coverage of the first bellwether outcome (Feb 2026).
- • N.D. Ga. MDL-2974 docket and case management orders.
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.