Preparing your case review…
Written By
People's Justice Legal Research Team
Filing Venue
Where to File in California
Exactech knee, hip, and ankle implant cases are consolidated in MDL 3062 — In re: Exactech Polyethylene Orthopedic Products Liability Litigation — in the Middle District of Florida before the Honorable Marcia G. Cooke (Miami Division). MDL 3062 was established in 2022 following Exactech's global recall of approximately 147,000 defective implants. The recall was triggered by a vacuum packaging breach affecting UHMWPE (ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene) bearing inserts in the Optetrak Logic, GPS Knee, and Novation Hip systems; improperly packaged inserts were exposed to oxygen during the manufacturing or storage process, causing oxidative degradation that substantially accelerates wear and increases the risk of catastrophic implant failure requiring revision surgery years ahead of the expected device lifespan. Exactech Inc. has been a subsidiary of private equity firm TPG Capital since 2018.
California imposes a three-year statute of limitations for product liability claims under CCP § 335.1, running from discovery of the injury or when the plaintiff reasonably should have known of the connection between the implant failure and the Exactech recall — whichever is later.
California ranks first nationally in total knee and hip replacement volume, with major orthopedic centers at UCSF, UCLA Health, and Cedars-Sinai performing thousands of Exactech-compatible procedures annually. Revision surgery rates in California track the national average of roughly 8–12% within ten years, though recalled-device cohorts show dramatically earlier failure.
California plaintiffs file in their home federal district (C.D. Cal., N.D. Cal., S.D. Cal., or E.D. Cal.), then the JPML automatically transfers the tag-along action to MDL 3062 in the Middle District of Florida. California counsel typically remains as local co-counsel post-transfer.
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
The Exactech recall is a voluntary recall initiated by Exactech Inc. in August 2021 and dramatically expanded in February 2022 covering approximately 147,000 polyethylene (PE) knee, hip, and ankle replacement components in the United States. The recall was triggered by the discovery that Exactech packaged its PE liners in defective bags lacking the required inner oxygen barrier — allowing the plastic to oxidize and degrade before implantation. Oxidized liners wear out far faster than expected, causing joint failure that requires patients to undergo revision surgery to remove and replace the failed implant.
The recall covers three Exactech knee replacement systems: the Optetrak Total Knee System, the Optetrak Logic Total Knee System, and the Truliant Total Knee System. The affected components are the polyethylene tibial and patellar liners within these systems. The recall also covers Exactech hip replacement systems (Alteon, Novation, Connexion) and the Vantage total ankle replacement system. The defect — packaging without the inner oxygen barrier — was present across all these product lines.
Your surgeon or the hospital that performed your knee replacement should have notified you if your implant is part of the recall. You can also check your implant card (given to you after surgery), operative report, or hospital discharge paperwork — these documents identify the manufacturer and model of your implant. If you received a knee replacement between approximately 2004 and 2021 and believe it may be an Exactech device, contact your orthopedic surgeon for confirmation. People's Justice can also help you identify your implant through a free case evaluation.
Warning signs of a failing Exactech implant include: increasing knee pain at rest or with activity (often worsening over time), joint instability or a feeling that the knee will give way, reduced range of motion compared to your initial post-operative recovery, swelling or warmth around the knee, grinding or clicking sensations with movement, and difficulty walking, climbing stairs, or rising from a chair. Some patients have no symptoms yet but imaging shows the implant is failing — this is why regular monitoring is important for anyone with a recalled device.
No. You do not need to have already undergone revision surgery to be eligible for a claim. Patients who have received a recall notification, are experiencing symptoms, or whose imaging shows implant deterioration may qualify even before surgery is performed. However, patients who have already had revision surgery typically have the strongest and highest-value claims because their injuries and damages are fully documented. If you have not yet had revision surgery, registering your claim early protects your rights and may allow your attorney to enter a tolling agreement that pauses the statute of limitations deadline.
No global settlement has been announced as of February 2026, and no bellwether verdicts have been reached. Based on comparable orthopedic device recalls — the DePuy ASR hip recall averaged ~$228,000 per claimant, and Stryker Rejuvenate averaged ~$300,000+ per claimant — plaintiff attorneys estimate Exactech cases in the $150,000–$2,000,000+ range depending on injury severity. Revision surgery cases with complications (infection, bone loss, permanent disability) are the most valuable. Cases without revision surgery yet carry lower current value but still qualify for registration and early claim filing.
Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is the surgical procedure to remove and replace a failed knee implant. It is substantially more complex and dangerous than the original knee replacement. Revision surgery involves removing the failed components (often partially bonded to bone), addressing any bone loss caused by osteolysis, and implanting new, larger components to stabilize the joint. Revision surgery carries 2–4 times the infection risk of primary knee replacement, requires general or spinal anesthesia, typically takes 2–4 hours, involves significant blood loss, and requires 3–6 months of rehabilitation. Patients with bone loss may require bone grafting. Some patients require a second or third revision if complications arise.
TPG Capital, a major private equity firm, acquired Exactech for approximately $737 million in 2018. Plaintiffs allege that TPG, as the controlling owner, knew or should have known about the packaging defect and had both the resources and authority to correct it — but failed to do so. Lawsuits assert alter-ego liability, claiming TPG exercised sufficient control over Exactech's operations to be held jointly responsible for the defective products. The involvement of a well-capitalized private equity firm significantly improves the potential recovery for victims, as Exactech alone might have limited assets relative to the scale of claims.
No. The Exactech litigation is not structured as a class action. Instead, each patient files an individual product liability lawsuit because the injuries, damages, and circumstances vary significantly from person to person. Individual lawsuits are often coordinated through multidistrict litigation (MDL) for pretrial efficiency, but each case retains its individual value. As of February 2026, no federal MDL has been formally established for Exactech — cases are coordinated informally in New York state court and the Middle District of Florida. An MDL petition may be filed as case volume grows.
The statute of limitations varies by state, typically 2–4 years from the date you knew or should have known about the defect. The 2021–2022 public recall announcement may have started the clock in many states. In Florida (Exactech's home state), the SOL is 2 years. In New York (primary litigation hub), it is 3 years with a strong discovery rule. In Texas and California, it is 2 years. Some states also impose a statute of repose (typically 10–12 years from implant date) that can bar claims for older implants regardless of when you discovered the problem. Do not delay — contact an attorney immediately for a free evaluation of your specific deadline.
Key evidence for your claim includes: (1) operative report from your knee replacement surgery identifying the Exactech implant by name and lot number; (2) implant identification card given to you after surgery; (3) recall notification letter from Exactech, your surgeon, or the hospital; (4) imaging records (X-rays, CT scans) showing implant deterioration or osteolysis; (5) surgical records from revision surgery if completed; (6) medical bills and records documenting all treatment; (7) documentation of lost wages or income; (8) records of pain management and physical therapy. People's Justice will help you gather these records as part of your case evaluation.
Most mass tort product liability cases — including orthopedic device recalls — settle before trial. The DePuy ASR hip recall settled approximately 8,000 cases without a trial. The Stryker Rejuvenate recall settled thousands of cases in a structured global resolution. However, Exactech litigation is still in early stages as of February 2026 — no global settlement has been announced, and bellwether trials are not expected until 2027 at the earliest. Your attorney will represent your interests through settlement negotiations and trial if necessary. People's Justice works on contingency — no fee unless you win.