Updated February 2026Active Litigation

Paragard IUD Lawsuit Lawsuit Tracker

Check Your Eligibility
Active LitigationLast updated: February 20, 2026

Paragard (T380A copper IUD) was FDA-approved in 1984 and has been used by millions of American women as a hormone-free long-term contraceptive. Women and their doctors began reporting a troubling pattern: when Paragard is removed — a routine office procedure — the device's copper-and-plastic arms snap off inside the patient. The retained fragments can migrate, perforate organs, cause chronic pelvic pain, and require invasive surgery including hysteroscopy, laparoscopy, and in some cases hysterectomy to remove. Women who suffered uterine perforation, organ damage, or infertility from a broken Paragard may have a product liability claim against Teva Pharmaceuticals. The MDL is pending before Judge Leigh Martin May in the Northern District of Georgia. The first bellwether trial (Rickard v. Teva) ended in a defense verdict on February 5, 2026. Two additional bellwether trials are scheduled in March and May 2026. Settlement negotiations are active. Claimants who can document breakage, surgery, and significant injury — especially infertility — have the strongest cases.

Case Timeline

Litigation Timeline

February 5, 2026

Teva Defense Verdict — Rickard v. Teva (First Bellwether)

On February 5, 2026, the jury in the first Paragard MDL bellwether trial — Rickard v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. — returned a defense verdict for Teva on all counts, including failure to warn and defective design. Plaintiff Pauline Rickard alleged that her Paragard broke during removal, causing injury requiring surgical intervention, and that Teva failed to warn of the fracture risk. Teva's defense successfully argued that the breakage risk was disclosed in Paragard's labeling and that removal technique contributed to the outcome. The verdict is a setback for the plaintiff's bar but does not end MDL 2974. Two additional bellwether trials are scheduled: one in March 2026 and one in May 2026. Settlement negotiations between plaintiffs and Teva continue alongside the bellwether process.

litigation
2022

FDA Issues Paragard Safety Warning — 2022

Following the accumulation of thousands of adverse event reports in the MAUDE database and a facility inspection of CooperSurgical operations, the FDA issued a safety warning regarding Paragard breakage during removal. The 2022 warning acknowledged the risk of device arm fracture and the potential for retained fragments to require surgical retrieval. Critics noted that the warning came decades after the breakage pattern was first documented in adverse event reports and medical literature, and that Paragard's prescribing information still did not adequately quantify the fracture risk or guide providers on prevention strategies.

regulatory
August 2020

MDL 2974 Established in Northern District of Georgia

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) established MDL No. 2974 — In re: Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation — in the Northern District of Georgia (Atlanta Division) before Judge Leigh Martin May. The MDL consolidated federal cases from across the country alleging that Teva Pharmaceuticals failed to adequately warn patients and providers about the risk of device arm fracture during Paragard removal. The Northern District of Georgia venue was significant: it placed the litigation in Atlanta, home to major women's health institutions, and within the Eleventh Circuit's jurisdiction. As of February 2026, approximately 3,867 cases are pending in MDL 2974.

litigation
1984–2022

FDA MAUDE Database — Breakage Reports Accumulate

Over the course of Paragard's market life, the FDA's MAUDE (Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience) database received more than 54,000 adverse event reports associated with the device. Reports of arm fracture during removal were documented consistently, but no coordinated regulatory action or labeling update adequately warning of the fracture risk was taken. In 2022 alone, the FDA received 1,231 breakage reports. OB/GYN medical literature documented that 9.6% of copper IUD adverse events involved device breakage — a rate nearly six times higher than the 1.7% breakage rate for hormonal IUD devices, suggesting a design-specific vulnerability.

regulatory
1984

Paragard FDA Approval — Device Enters U.S. Market

The FDA approved the Paragard T380A copper intrauterine device in 1984. The device was approved as a long-term, hormone-free contraceptive option with an up to 10-year duration of effectiveness. The original approval labeling described the T-shaped polyethylene frame with copper wire winding and flexible copper-tipped arms. The risk of arm fracture during removal — which would become the central allegation in MDL 2974 — was not prominently disclosed in original labeling and evolved inadequately over subsequent decades of device use.

regulatory
Case Results

Notable Verdicts & Settlements

Verdict
$0

Rickard v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (MDL 2974 — First Bellwether)

On February 5, 2026, Teva won the first Paragard MDL bellwether trial on all counts, including failure to warn and defective design. Plaintiff Pauline Rickard alleged that her Paragard IUD broke during removal in 2018, requiring surgical intervention, and that Teva failed to adequately warn patients and providers about the risk of arm fracture. Teva's defense successfully argued that Paragard's labeling disclosed the arm breakage risk and that the plaintiff's provider's removal technique was a contributing factor. Judge Leigh Martin May presided. Two more bellwether trials are scheduled: March and May 2026. A defense verdict does not end the MDL — cases with stronger evidence of injury and clearer failure-to-warn profiles remain viable. Settlement negotiations between the parties continue alongside the bellwether process.

2026-02-05
Stay informed

Get free updates on the Paragard IUD Lawsuit as it develops

No phone call required. We will email you when there is meaningful news — new filings, settlements, or important deadlines.

By submitting, you agree to receive email updates about this case. You can unsubscribe anytime. This is not legal advice, and we are not a law firm.

Full Case Details

Want the Complete Picture?

View eligibility criteria, settlement information, scientific evidence, and start a free case review.

View Full Paragard IUD Lawsuit Case Page