Paragard IUD Litigation

Paragard Lawsuit Related to Injury upon Insertion or Removal

Intrauterine devices (IUD) are a growingly popular form of birth control, and they are consistently being lauded by women around the country about the ease it introduces to their lives. However, although these devices are beneficial, they are not without their dangers nor are they completely harmless.

Paragard is a copper based IUD and although it has a 99% effectiveness at preventing pregnancy, there have been cases of the Paragard IUD fracturing upon removal. This action means that parts of the device splinter and spread out and this often leads to serious complications and injury. Some of these injuries and complications include infertility, miscarriages, ectopic pregnancies, and not to mention the pain and distress that individuals experience.

Understanding The Paragard Lawsuits

The severe side effects and complications that have stemmed from the Paragard IUD are very far reaching and they have affected thousands of people who underwent the procedure. CooperSurgical and Teva Pharmaceuticals manufacture Paragard and they are gearing up to be defendants in multiple paragard lawsuits. This however has been distilled down into the Paragard multi-district litigation (MDL).

These lawsuits are brought by individuals injured due to the insertion of a Paragard IUD. If you believe you have been injured by your Paragard IUD please give us a call today to discuss more options regarding a Paragard IUD lawsuit.

Paragard Dangers and Side Effects

It is important to draw a distinction between the base dangers of the Paragard IUD and the additional dangers that are presented upon removal. The insertion of this specific IUD often gives women heavier periods, coupled with other discomfort and pain. However, these symptoms are not life threatening and they vary greatly from the adverse side effects that come from the allegedly defective Paragard IUD when it is being removed.

This is an important distinction to make because you have to ensure that if you are pursuing a Paragard lawsuit that you’re doing it for the right reasons and for the right symptoms. The issues with this specific IUD usually become more apparent once the device is removed and further complications arise.

Paragard IUD Frequently Asked Questions

What are the common issues that arise from the removal of a paragard copper IUD?

The most common problems that come up with the removal of this copper device are:

  • Breakage of the device which results in inflammation of the uterine tract and surrounding areas.
  • Tearing of internal organs
  • Complications that result in infertility
  • Potential for miscarriages
  • Ectopic pregnancies. These are pregnancies where the fertilized egg implants and resides outside the uterus.

Hysterectomy or other organ removalEach of these issues can be extremely dangerous on their own, so if you think any of these apply to you and they are related to your Paragard IUD, you may have grounds for a case. Contact us today to discuss your options.

How do I know if I have a claim in this lawsuit?

The Paragard lawsuit involves complaints that are being lodged against the manufacturer for issuing a defective medical product. As mentioned above, the manufacturers of this IUD device are CooperSurgical and Teva Pharmaceuticals. The plaintiffs who have lodged cases across the county each share similar stories that all tell a rather harrowing tale of severe pain and discomfort caused by the Paragard device.

If you fall within this category and you believe you have been wrongfully injured because of this medical device, then you definitely have a claim. The next step is to reach out to us to discuss your options and see how we can best advise you.

How does Multi-district litigation work?

In simple terms a multi-district litigation occurs when similar cases are pooled together from multiple districts across the country and handled and moved to one central court. There are several benefits that this process allows for. These include an expedited litigation process, giving attorneys the ability to combine legal resources, as well as increasing the general recognition that a case is getting.

Our Reputation

The Krause & Kinsman Law Firm is made up of some of the nation’s foremost legal minds in the mass-tort field. That’s why our clients & co-counsel partners choose us.

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee, and Co-Chair of the Law & Briefing Committee in MDL 2846:

In Re: Davol, Inc./C.R. Bard, Inc., Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee in MDL 2974:

In Re: Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee in MDL 2924:

In Re: Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation

Along with the aforementioned MDLs,

Plaintiff’s Counsel has prosecuted thousands of cases across other Multi-District Litigations and Mass-Torts, including:

MDL No. 3043:

Acetaminophen ASD/ADHD Product Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2753:

Atrium Medical Corp. C-Qur Mesh Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2782:

Ethicon Physiomesh Flexible Composite Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation

MCL No. 627:

In Re: Physiomesh Litigation, MCL

MCL No. 633:

In Re: Prolene Hernia System Mesh Litigation

MDL No. 2750:

Cook Medical, Inc., IVC Filters Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2641:

Bard IVC Filters Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2326:

In Re: Boston Scientific Corp. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2606:

Benicar (Olmesartan) Product Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2666:

In Re: Forced Air Warming Devices Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2591:

Syngenta AG MIR162 Corn Litigation

MDL No. 2936:

In Re: Smity’s/CAM2303 Tractor Hydraulic Fluid Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation

MCL No. 630:

In Re: Proceed Mesh Litigation

MDL No. 2543:

In Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation

MDL No. 2004:

In Re: Mentor Corp. ObTape Transobturator Sling Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2187:

In Re: C. R. Bard, Inc. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2325:

In Re: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2327:

In Re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2387:

In Re: Coloplast Corp. Pelvic Support Systems Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 251:

In Re: Neomedic Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

Highly Awarded Trial Attorneys

The Krause & Kinsman Law Firm is one of the nation’s leading mass-tort & personal-injury law firms. The founding partners, Adam & Robert, have been selected to serve on steering committees for some of the largest pharmaceutical mass-tort cases.

Working With Us

Partnering with Krause & Kinsman is easy. When you partner with Krause & Kinsman, you can be sure that our mutual clients’ complex matters are handled with the utmost care and dedication. In addition to our top-notch representation, we will ensure our mutual clients receive frequent communication about the status of their cases.

Partner With Us

Why Us?

Recognized leaders in mass-torts with vast experience in complex litigation.

Your clients will appreciate the high-quality representation provided.

Your clients will consistently real-time updates on the status of their case via video, email, text, and phone.

Get real-time updates on the status of our mutual clients while their cases progress.

Collaborate on the case together and receive co-counsel fees.