Mirena lawsuits accuse Bayer Pharmaceuticals of hiding side effects and making a defective device. More than 2,400 Mirena lawsuits were pending in courts in New Jersey and New York in March 2018. Women blame the birth control device for poking holes in organs (perforation), moving around in the body (migration) and causing pressure buildup in the skull (pseudotumor cerebri).
Thousands of women nationwide sued Bayer Pharmaceuticals over Mirena.
Mirena lawsuits claimed the birth control device poked holes in organs. Doctors call this perforation.
Other lawsuits say the devices can move around in the body (device migration).
More recent lawsuits blame Mirena for pressure buildup in the skull called pseudotumor cerebri.
The lawsuits accuse the company of selling a dangerous product. They also claim the company used deceptive advertising deceptive advertising. They say Bayer hid the risk of complications.
Drugwatch’s legal partners are not accepting new Mirena lawsuits. That could change in the future.
There are two federal multidistrict litigations over Mirena. In the first, a judge overseeing 1,775 Mirena cases dismissed most of the lawsuits in 2016. Only three lawsuits remained pending in May 2018.
The cases did not go to trial, so there were no major verdicts. Bayer did not announce a global settlement in those cases.
Another 523 lawsuits were pending in the second Mirena MDL as of May 2018. Those lawsuits blame Mirena for pressure buildup in the skull. The medical community calls the injury pseudotumor cerebri. A federal panel consolidated these lawsuits. A judge in the Southern District of New York was handling the proceedings.
Another 2,000 Mirena lawsuits say the device moved out of place and caused injuries. A judge in New Jersey Superior Court Bergen County was overseeing the lawsuits.
Mirena lawsuits blamed the device for organ perforation. This is when the device pokes a hole through an organ, such as the uterus.
Other lawsuits focus on device misplacement and device migration. They say the device moved inside the body and injured women.
A new group of Mirena lawsuits claim Mirena caused pseudotumor cerebri. This term means “false brain tumor.” This condition is also known as intracranial hypertension.
Women who filed Mirena lawsuits accuse Bayer of knowingly harming them. They say Mirena’s label didn’t warn them about serious complications. They want compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering.
There are currently no class actions pending in Mirena litigation.
A class action allows for one or more plaintiffs to file a lawsuit on behalf of a larger group of injured people. The larger group is the class.
Instead, a panel grouped federal Mirena lawsuits into two consolidated cases in New York. The courts call these multidistrict litigations (MDLs).
Others are part of a multicounty case in New Jersey.
The lawsuits in each consolidated case make similar claims against Bayer.
Two multidistrict litigations involving Mirena remained open as of March 2018. One MDL includes lawsuits that claimed device migration, organ perforation and related injuries. The other focuses on lawsuits that blame Mirena for pseudotumor cerebri.
The first Mirena MDL focused on organ perforation, among other injuries.
Bayer noted in court documents that Mirena contained a warning that said, “Perforation or penetration of the uterine wall or cervix may occur during insertion although the perforation may not be detected until some time later.”
The lawsuits argued that Mirena could perforate the uterus at any time — even without injury at insertion.
Lawsuits called this “secondary perforation,” “spontaneous perforation” or “spontaneous migration.” They alleged Bayer’s label used from 2008 through 2014 did not contain warnings for secondary perforation.
“The Court reaches this conclusion reluctantly, knowing that it will doom hundreds of cases, but in the Court’s view it is compelled by the law.”
In April 2017, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation agreed to group “pressure on the brain” cases into their own MDL.
At that time, there were about 113 head-related lawsuits against Bayer in 17 districts.
The cases pointed to a hormone contained in Mirena as the cause for plaintiffs’ condition.
As of March 2018, about 451 consolidated cases were pending before Judge Paul A. Engelmayer in the Southern District of New York.
In 2013, the court consolidated cases into multicounty litigation in New Jersey. Judge Brian R. Martinotti oversaw the cases. Then, in 2016, the court reassigned those cases to Judge Rachelle L. Harz.
“The complaints filed allege that the plaintiffs suffered injuries and/or damages as a result of misplacement of the Mirena device ”
Plaintiffs in New Jersey had similar complaints to those in New York. Cases in New Jersey were in the middle of discovery in March 2018.
During discovery both sides of a lawsuit provide each other with requested information. This may include internal documents and medical testimony.
Please seek the advice of a medical professional before making health care decisions.
Kristin Compton
Writer
Kristin Compton's background is in legal studies. She worked as a paralegal before joining Drugwatch as a writer and researcher. She was also a member of the National Association of Legal Assistance. A mother and longtime patient, she has firsthand experience of the harmful effects prescription drugs can have on women and their children. Some of her qualifications include:
Calling this number connects you with Wilson and Peterson, LLP or one of its trusted legal partners. A law firm representative will review your case for free.
Wilson and Peterson, LLP funds Drugwatch because it supports the organization’s mission to keep people safe from dangerous drugs and medical devices.
(888) 645-1617To contact Drugwatch Managing Editor Kevin Connolly, call (855) 839-9780.
