Case guide

AngioDynamics Port Test Trials: How Cases Are Picked

The court in San Diego is picking a small set of port cases to test at trial. Here is how cases are chosen and what it means if yours is or is not one.

See If You Qualify

Free · No obligation · About 2 minutes

Does this case involve physical injury, a medical diagnosis, or significant financial loss? *

Updated Oct 5, 202631 sources

This may apply to you if

  • You had an AngioDynamics or Navilyst port under your skin, such as a Smart Port, BioFlo, Vortex or Xcela port.
  • You later had a broken catheter, an infection or a blood clot tied to the port.
  • You can get records that show which port you had, such as its model or lot number.

What the public record says

These are cited sources. Their inclusion does not imply that they endorse People’s Justice or reviewed this page.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California · Court presiding over MDL 3125 (Case Management Order No. 6)

Finding: Case Management Order No. 6 sets an 18-case Initial Pool, a Bellwether Pool of five picks per side with one strike each, court review that the pool represents pending cases, and alternating trial order.

S.D. Cal., MDL 3125 Case Management Order No. 6 (Dkt. 442) (opens in a new tab) · Oct 14, 2025 · Checked Oct 5, 2026

The short answer

What is a test trial in a group of cases?
A bellwether is a test trial: one person’s case tried early to help move a large group of cases toward an end. That is how a guide for federal judges describes it. The guide says a verdict in one test case does not clearly bind anyone else’s case. [28]
How does the court pick the AngioDynamics test cases?
It works in steps. First, the two sides each pick nine cases, for a first group of 18. Later each side picks five of those, and each may strike one of the other side’s picks. That leaves eight or nine cases. [5]
Where does the AngioDynamics test case process stand now?
It is running behind the first plan. In April 2026, the court pushed back every pending deadline in its two schedule orders by 60 days. AngioDynamics asked for that because outside providers were slow to send medical records. The people suing did not object. [29]
What happens if my case is picked for the first group?
You would fill out a longer form about your health and your port. The draft form is signed under penalty of perjury. Each side can then question you and others under oath before trial, including your spouse and your doctors. [5]

What rules a case out

Not covered by this case

  • This page cannot say whether your case will be picked or how it will turn out.
  • It does not give the new dates set after April 2026, because we could not read that order.

The process

What happens next

  1. 01

    You answer a few questions

    About two minutes. Nothing is sent until you agree on the last step and press submit.

  2. 02

    A lawyer looks at it

    A lawyer at the firm reads your answers and checks them against the current case criteria.

  3. 03

    The firm decides and gets in touch

    If the firm takes your case, you get the terms in writing to read before you sign. You can always say no.

What is a test trial in a group of cases?

A bellwether is a test trial: one person’s case tried early to help move a large group of cases toward an end. That is how a guide for federal judges describes it. The guide says a verdict in one test case does not clearly bind anyone else’s case.

The same guide warns that letting each side pick cases freely can produce extreme picks. It says the cases tried should represent the range of cases in the group.

How does the court pick the AngioDynamics test cases?

It works in steps. First, the two sides each pick nine cases, for a first group of 18. Later each side picks five of those, and each may strike one of the other side’s picks. That leaves eight or nine cases.

Before the first picks, the two sides sorted cases by the three kinds of injury in the case: infection, a broken catheter and blood clots. The order says the test group should reflect that mix. On March 2, 2026, they filed a joint statement on the mix.

The judge then checks that the final group is a fair sample of the cases waiting in San Diego, and issues an order naming them. Those cases are set for separate trials. The order says the two sides’ picks take turns, so neither side has two of its picks tried in a row.

If a person in the final group drops their case, AngioDynamics may swap in another case from the first group with the same kind of injury.

Where does the AngioDynamics test case process stand now?

It is running behind the first plan. In April 2026, the court pushed back every pending deadline in its two schedule orders by 60 days. AngioDynamics asked for that because outside providers were slow to send medical records. The people suing did not object.

On August 4, 2026, the two sides filed a joint notice naming the cases for the first group. That notice is not public on the free court record site we used, so we do not know who was picked or how many.

We could not read the April 24, 2026 order with the new dates. So this page does not list them, and some dates on older pages may be out of date. The orders we read set no trial dates.

What happens if my case is picked for the first group?

You would fill out a longer form about your health and your port. The draft form is signed under penalty of perjury. Each side can then question you and others under oath before trial, including your spouse and your doctors.

The order also allows sworn questions to your primary care doctors, from two years before you got the port until now. AngioDynamics may ask for more, such as written questions or more records. If your case reaches the final group, medical exams may be added.

Your lawyer can tell you what being picked would mean for your time and your privacy.

What if my case is not picked?

Your case stays in the group while the shared pretrial work goes on. A test trial’s result does not decide your case. The orders we read do not say what happens next to cases that are not picked.

Federal law says each case sent to San Diego goes back to its home court by the end of the shared pretrial work, unless it has ended. A case filed straight into San Diego goes to the court named in its complaint, unless a judge finds good reason to send it elsewhere.

Filing straight into San Diego does not mean anyone agreed to hold a trial there. The two sides can agree to that later. The orders we read do not say where test trials will be held.

Find out where you stand.

The review is free and private. Asking for it doesn’t commit you to anything.

Register your interest

Sources

  1. JPML Transfer Order, In re AngioDynamics, Inc., and Navilyst Medical, Inc., Port Catheter Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3125 (Oct. 3, 2024)JPML transfer order, MDL 3125 · court
  2. JPML, Pending MDL Dockets by Actions Pending (report date Oct. 1, 2026)JPML pending MDL report, Oct. 1, 2026 · court
  3. JPML, Pending MDL Dockets by MDL Number (report date Oct. 1, 2026)JPML pending MDLs by number, Oct. 1, 2026 · court
  4. S.D. Cal., MDL 3125, Stipulated Case Management Order No. 1 (Direct Filing, Service of Process, Attorney Registration), Dkt. 152 (Jan. 27, 2025)MDL 3125 Case Management Order 1 · court
  5. S.D. Cal., MDL 3125, Case Management Order No. 6 (bellwether selection and profile forms), Dkt. 442 (Oct. 14, 2025)MDL 3125 Case Management Order 6 · court
  6. S.D. Cal., MDL 3125, Case Management Order No. 7 (common-issue schedule), Dkt. 466 (Oct. 31, 2025)MDL 3125 Case Management Order 7 · court
  7. S.D. Cal., MDL 3125, Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants' Motions to Dismiss, Dkt. 239 (Apr. 24, 2025)MDL 3125 order on time-limit motions, Apr. 2025 · court
  8. S.D. Cal., MDL 3125, Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants' Motions to Dismiss [Dkts. 384, 385], Dkt. 501 (Nov. 14, 2025)MDL 3125 order on time-limit motions, Nov. 2025 · court
  9. S.D. Cal., MDL 3125, Parties' Joint Submission on Proposed Plaintiff Fact Sheet, Dkt. 762 (July 21, 2026)MDL 3125 proposed plaintiff fact sheet · court
  10. S.D. Cal., MDL 3125, Order Setting Briefing Schedule on Motion to Compel, Setting Status Conference, and Governing Discovery Responses, Dkt. 824 (Sept. 22, 2026)MDL 3125 order of Sept. 22, 2026 · court
  11. S.D. Cal., MDL 3125, Case Management Order No. 8 Governing Discovery Process Relating to Plaintiff Profile Forms, Dkt. 573 (Jan. 16, 2026)MDL 3125 Case Management Order 8 · court
  12. CourtListener docket, In re AngioDynamics, Inc., and Navilyst Medical, Inc., Port Catheter Products Liability Litigation, No. 3:24-md-03125 (S.D. Cal.)MDL 3125 docket (CourtListener) · court
  13. Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendants AngioDynamics, Inc. and Navilyst Medical, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss, MDL 3125, Dkt. 194-1 (Feb. 20, 2025)AngioDynamics' motion to dismiss brief · court
  14. FDA Medical Device Recall database: Class 2 Device Recall Vortex MP Port (Z-0132-2023)FDA recall: Vortex MP Port (2022) · regulator
  15. FDA Medical Device Recall database: Class 2 Device Recall Smart Port CT (Z-1466-2021)FDA recall: Smart Port CT (2021) · regulator
  16. FDA Medical Device Recall database: Class 2 Device Recall BioFlo Port with ENDEXO and PASV Technology (Z-0076-2019)FDA recall: BioFlo Port (2018) · regulator
  17. openFDA device recall records for recalling firms AngioDynamics and Navilyst (all 410 product records, queried Oct. 5, 2026)openFDA recall records · regulator
  18. FDA: About Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE)FDA: About MAUDE · regulator
  19. openFDA device adverse event (MAUDE) records for AngioDynamics or Navilyst, product code LJT (implanted port), counted by brand name (queried Oct. 5, 2026)openFDA adverse event records · regulator
  20. National Cancer Institute, NCI Dictionary of Cancer Terms: portNCI Dictionary: port · regulator
  21. Braun U, et al. Mechanic and surface properties of central-venous port catheters after removal: A comparison of polyurethane and silicon rubber materials. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2016;64:281-91Braun et al., 2016 · study
  22. Wildgruber M, et al. Polyurethane versus silicone catheters for central venous port devices implanted at the forearm. Eur J Cancer. 2016;59:113-124Wildgruber et al., 2016 · study
  23. Surov A, et al. Port catheter insufficiency: incidence and clinical-radiological correlations. Onkologie. 2008;31(8-9):455-61Surov et al., 2008 · study
  24. Goossens GA, et al. Systematic review: malfunction of totally implantable venous access devices in cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 2011;19(7):883-98Goossens et al., 2011 · study
  25. ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5: FeesABA Model Rule 1.5
  26. HHS: Your Medical RecordsHHS: Your Medical Records · regulator
  27. S.D.N.Y. Pro Se FAQ: How long do I have to file my complaint (statute of limitations)?SDNY: filing time limits · court
  28. Federal Judicial Center: Managing MDL in products liability cases (2011)
  29. CourtListener docket, MDL 3125 (S.D. Cal.)
  30. CourtListener docket, MDL 3125 (S.D. Cal.)CourtListener docket, MDL 3125 (S.D. Cal.) · court
  31. JPML: 28 U.S.C. § 1407 (multidistrict litigation)JPML: 28 U.S.C. § 1407 (multidistrict litigation) · court

Checked against 31 primary sources by People's Justice editors · Updated

How we make money

People's Justice research team · Updated Oct 5, 2026