Court Outlines Requirements for Depo-Provera Lawsuit Proof of Use, Type of Meningioma Tumor

Court Outlines Requirements for Depo-Provera Lawsuit Proof of Use, Type of Meningioma Tumor

As a growing number of Depo-Provera meningioma lawsuits continue to be filed in the federal court system, the Court has established the specific criteria for plaintiffs to establish the specific form of the birth control they received, as well as the type of brain tumor diagnosed.

Depo-Provera has been on the market for more than 30 years, and millions of women have received the birth control injections to help prevent pregnancy. However, concerns over Depo-Provera brain tumor side effects began to emerge late last year, after studies detected a link between meningioma and Depo-Provera, with researchers now indicating that some women could face more than five times the risk of developing brain tumors.

Over the past six months, nearly 300 women have filed product liability lawsuits against Depo-Provera manufacturers, each raising similar allegations that users and the medical community were not adequately warned about the risks associated with the shots. However, as more women learn about the cause of their injuries, it is widely expected that thousands of additional claims may ultimately be filed in the coming months and years.

Depo-Provera-Lawsuit-Settlement
Depo-Provera-Lawsuit-Settlement

In February, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation established a Depo-Provera meningioma MDL, centralizing claims brought throughout the federal court system in the Northern District of Florida, where District Judge M. Casey Rodgers has been appointed to oversee coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings.

Judge Rodgers is a veteran of large mass tort litigation, and has moved rapidly to start preparing the first Depo-Provera lawsuits for trial, indicating that a small group of pilot cases will serve as bellwether test trials to help bring a resolution to the litigation.

However, to help effectively manage the rapidly growing litigation, the parties and court agreed early on that each plaintiff will be required to provide initial documentary proof that they used versions of the Depo-Provera shot manufactured by each defendant named in the lawsuit, as well as meningioma diagnosis information, within 120 days of bringing their case.

Depo-Provera Meningioma Diagnosis Requirements

On May 12, Judge Rodgers issued a pretrial order (PDF) outlining the process for identifying potential deficiencies in plaintiffs’ claims. It includes a requirement that the plaintiff have a requisite physical injury, which, for the purpose of the litigation, includes evidence of a diagnosis with one of the following types of brain tumors:

  • Meningioma
  • Intracranial meningioma
  • Intercranial meningioma
  • Cranial meningioma
  • Brain meningioma
  • Meninges tumor
  • Arachnoid tumor (but not arachnoid cyst)
  • Convexity meningioma
  • Falcine meningioma
  • Parasagittal meningioma
  • Intraventricular meningioma
  • Skull base meningioma
  • Sphenoid wing meningioma
  • Olfactory groove meningioma
  • Posterior fossa/petrous meningioma
  • Suprasellar meningioma
  • Recurrent meningioma
  • Foramen magnum meningioma
  • Meningothelial meningioma
  • Fibrous meningioma
  • Psammomatous meningioma
  • Angiomatous meningioma
  • Secretory meningioma

Qualifying Depo-Provera Injection Brands and Formulations 

In addition, plaintiffs must indicate that their physical injury was the result of, or exacerbated by, one of the following versions of the popular birth control injection:

  • Depo Provera
  • Depo-Provera Contraceptive Injection (DPCI)
  • Depo Provera IM
  • Depo Medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA)
  • Medroxyprogesterone Acetate (MPA or IM MPA)
  • Depo-SubQ Provera 104
  • Greenstone Medroxyprogesterone
  • Greenstone MPA
  • Prasco Medroxyprogesterone
  • Prasco MPA

Each plaintiff must also establish their citizenship, and note the citizenship of each named defendant.

“The Court notes that a majority of the Complaints already filed in this Court or in other districts and transferred to this MDL do not contain the requisite threshold allegations,” the order states. “All Complaints filed to date in the MDL, including in transferred cases, will be reviewed for deficiencies and evaluated by the process described in this Order and its attachments.”

In a  separate order (PDF) issued on May 6, Judge Rodgers provided a list of the documents plaintiffs are required to provide to show the court they suffered injuries and received the birth control injections at issue. These include proof and date of diagnosis.

Depo-Provera Lawsuit Sign-Up Criteria 

As a series of Depo-Provera brain tumor lawsuits continue to be prepared for early trials over the coming months, more women are expected to come forward each month to seek justice and compensation for injuries linked to the birth control injection.

Depo-Provera meningioma lawyers provide free consultations to women across the U.S. who received the injection and were later diagnosed with a qualifying meningioma tumor. Common Depo-Provera brain tumor symptoms include:

  • Persistent headaches
  • Dizziness
  • Memory loss

At no cost, attorneys are helping women determine whether they may be eligible to sign up for a Depo-Provera lawsuit, to seek financial compensation for their injuries due to the drug makers’ failure to adequately warn about the risk of meningioma and other brain tumors associated with the contraceptive.

To learn more about the Depo-Provera lawsuit signup criteria, submit information about your claim for a free case evaluation. All lawsuits are handled by lawyers on a contingency-fee basis, meaning there are no out-of-pocket costs unless a settlement or recovery is obtained.




0 Comments


Share Your Comments

This field is hidden when viewing the form
I authorize the above comments be posted on this page
Post Comment
Weekly Digest Opt-In

Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?

To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This 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.

MORE TOP STORIES

A BioZorb lawsuit claims that the recalled implant’s defective design led to the device migrating through a woman’s flesh, causing a severe infection.
As the number of Bard PowerPort lawsuits brought over design defects associated with the port catheter system continues to mount, lawyers have agreed on the first bellwether case that should go before a jury.