Bard IVC Filter Settlement Track or Remand of All Cases To Be Considered by MDL Judge

  • Written by: Irvin Jackson

Contact A Lawyer

Have A Potential Case Reviewed By An Attorney

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The U.S. District Judge presiding over all federal Bard IVC filter lawsuits indicates that the Court will consider whether to establish a separate track for cases likely to be resolved in settlement, or whether to simply begin remanding all cases after an upcoming bellwether trial.

There are currently more than 5,700 product liability cases pending in a federal multidistrict litigation, each involving allegations that plaintiffs experienced complications with IVC filters manufactured by C.R. Bard, including reports that the retrievable blood clot filters moved out of position, punctured internal organs or fractured, causing small pieces to travel throughout the body.

Given similar questions of fact and law presented in the cases, the litigation has been centralized before U.S. District Judge David G. Campbell in the District of Arizona since August 2015, for coordinated discovery and a group of “bellwether” trials designed to help gauge how juries are likely to respond to certain evidence and testimony that is likely to be repeated throughout the litigation.

After mixed results in a serious of early trial dates, Judge Campbell has already begun remanding “mature” cases that were ready for trial, and has previously suggested that large numbers of cases will be sent back to different U.S. District Courts nationwide for separate trials if Bard IVC filter settlements are not reached by the parties to resolve the litigation.

In a case management order (PDF) issued on February 8, Judge Campbell agreed to consider a proposal by C.R. Bard, which asks the court to establish a separate track for cases in the MDL that are likely to be settled, including cases that have been settled in principal or which are near settlement, rather than remanding all cases. Judge Campbell indicated that the Court is willing to consider such a procedure and asked the parties to submit a joint proposal by March 1.

“Any such proposal would need to specify the basis on which a case would be identified to be placed on a settlement track rather than being remanded to the transferor court, establish a schedule under which cases on the settlement track would either reach a completed settlement or be remanded, and a schedule for when the settlement track would be initiated and how long it would remain in place,” according to the order.

After receiving the submission, the court will consider whether a separate track for certain Bard IVC filter cases that may settle is appropriate, or whether the MDL should simply begin remanding all cases back to U.S. District Courts nationwide if the litigation is not resolved following the last bellwether trial.

A lawsuit filed by Debra Tinlin is currently set for trial to begin before Judge Campbell on May 13, 2019, involving a fractured Bard Recovery filter, which resulted in the need for open heart surgery. However, given the plaintiffs current health condition, it is unclear whether she will be able to travel to Arizona for trial, and the parties have been directed to confer about the possibility of Tinlin participating in the trial remotely from the federal court in Wisconsin if she is unable to travel.

This last scheduled bellwether trial will be closely watched given the mixed results from earlier trials. In April 2018, the first Bard IVC filter trial ended in a $3.6 million award, after a jury found that the manufacturer recklessly disregarded the safety of consumers who received their filters. However, subsequent cases have either ended in a defense verdict in favor of the manufacturer, or been dismissed before trial began.

In addition to the cases filed against Bard, another 3,750 Cook IVC filter lawsuits are centralized as part of a separate MDL, involving similar allegations of design defects. Last week, an Indiana jury found that Cook Medical should be required to pay $3 million in compensatory damages to one plaintiff, and is still considering additional punitive damages during a second phase of the on-going trial.

Tags: , ,


  1. Thomas Reply

    Be glad when its over!

  2. Lisa Reply

    My husband is the plaintiff in a filed IVC filter case in Fresno CA. He passed away on 9-13-2018 the case was filed in Jan 2019. It is a very solid case. Is C R Bard going to make settlement offers and if so what is your opinion on the time frame to receive monies. It is very upseting and hurts my heart that my husband suffered so much and he is not here to recieve his well deserved compensation

  3. angela Reply

    Can someone please explain what this means, my husband had a fractured IVC filter removed and we filed in 2016 so do we have to start all over again after this trial?

  4. John Reply

    How much longer is this going to drag on?

  5. Jill Reply

    I filed my suit 4 years ago. The broken filter has caused a stroke, M.I.,and is causing bleeding requiring transfusions. One part is in the abdominal aorta sticking out both ends. The rest has migr as ted to a position just behind the hepatic artery. If either moves I will pass in a matter of min.
    I hsve been to lo d it is in settlement negotiations snd should be over in Dec. I hsve my doubts. Frankly there is no amount that can make up not only from the physical but the emotional damage that is being done every day.

  6. SHAWN Reply

    Its ridiculous how long these cases are taking i failed my claim almost 5 years ago

  7. I did. The same. 5 years ago and cone to. Find out my lawer is charging 35 %. Fml Reply

    I did. The same. 5 years ago and cone to. Find out my lawer is charging me 35%

  8. Kandyce Reply

    I have had a case against Bard since 2013. Still waiting when it was placed in me in 2005. In the meantime my father had one placed that broke and because my distraught mother didn’t get an autopsy, they refused her case. My entire family suffers. Their offer came in 2 yrs ago at a ridiculously low amount that we still have not received on my case. It’s not worth the time or headache to file a lawsuit. Best to just try and get through life and drop the headache & heartache of a fruitless time consuming lawsuit. You’ll find yourself in red tape and one empty promise after another and be left with such a small settlement it won’t cover the price of removal or even the cost of used car with over 200k miles on it. Word to the wise. This is a racket for the lawyers. Your life and your loved ones doesn’t matter in the end. Do the math 2021 – 2013 …years with nothing but empty promises! Not to mention the realization you could die from the injuries at any given minute.

  • Share Your Comments

  • Have Your Comments Reviewed by a Lawyer

    Provide additional contact information if you want an attorney to review your comments and contact you about a potential case. This information will not be published.
  • NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Contact A Lawyer

Contact A Lawyer

Have A Potential Case Reviewed By An Attorney

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.