AngioDynamics Port Catheter Lawsuit Bellwether Selection Plan Outlined by Lawyers

Early test trials will focus on claims involving port catheter infections, device fractures and thrombosis injuries.

Attorneys in the AngioDynamics port catheter litigation have proposed selecting 18 test cases by early June 2025, which will form an initial bellwether pool that is representative of dozens of other claims pending in the federal court system.

There are currently at least 128 AngioDynamics lawsuits being pursued over problems with the company’s line of port catheter implants, including the SmartPort, Vortex Port, Xcela Port and other models. However, it is widely expected that the size and scope of the litigation will continue to increase in the coming months and years

The AngioDynamics port catheters are commonly used in patients who require frequent chemotherapy or other intravenous treatments, consisting of a subdermal port connected to a catheter. However, lawsuits allege that the ports are defectively designed and prone to serious complications.

As a result, users have reported experiencing painful and devastating injuries from catheter fractures, infections, device migration and thrombosis, which often result in the need for additional surgery to remove or replace the failed implant.

To streamline the growing litigation, all federal AngioDynamics port catheter lawsuits have been centralized before U.S. District Judge Jinsook Ohta in the Southern District of California, as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL) process designed to coordinate discovery and pretrial proceedings.

The allegations raised in the AngioDynamics litigation mirror those brought in nearly 2,000 Bard PowerPort lawsuits filed against C.R. Bard, which are proceeding as part of a separate MDL in the District of Arizona. Both sets of claims involve similar design defects, including catheter fractures and migration.

As the AngioDynamics litigation moves forward, Judge Ohta is overseeing preparations for a series of early test trials. These “bellwether” cases are intended to gauge how juries may respond to key evidence and expert testimony that will be central to claims throughout the MDL, and could help drive port catheter settlement negotiations or shape the course of future trials.

Last month, she ordered the parties to jointly develop a process for selecting the most representative cases to serve as potential port catheter bellwether trials. Those port catheter lawsuits will then go through additional discovery and preparations for early trial dates.

The parties turned in a joint bellwether proposed case management order (PDF) on October 1, indicating that each side will select nine potential bellwether trials, for a total of 18, and present them to the Court by June 5, 2026. The order calls for the cases to focus on three types of injuries, including infections, device fractures and thrombosis injuries.

If the parties choose some of the same cases, resulting in a pool of less than 18 claims, they will only seek replacements if the total number of port catheter lawsuits is less than 16.

The order indicates the parties will work together to draft a plaintiff fact sheet and defendant fact sheet for the claims by May 15, 2026, and the plaintiffs selected for the initial trial pool will be required to serve a plaintiff fact sheet by July 15, 2026. Defendants will produce a fact sheet for each case by September 1, 2026.

The plan calls for the parties to reduce the pool down to four selections each by December 11, 2026, for a final group of eight bellwether trial claims. Following discovery, expert depositions and motions, the first trial date would not likely begin until at least early 2028.

While the results of those bellwether trials will not be binding on other plaintiffs pursuing claims, they could help gauge how juries will respond to similar evidence and testimony likely to be repeated throughout the litigation. In addition, the average AngioDynamics port lawsuit payouts awarded by juries may help lawyers negotiate settlements in other claims.

Following the MDL proceedings, if the parties do not reach a resolution for the litigation, Judge Ohta may then remand each case back to the U.S. District Court where it originated for a future trial date.

Sign up for more legal news that could affect you or your family.