Motion Filed To Centralize Depo-Provera Lawsuits in Federal MDL Over Brain Tumor Risks

Nearly two dozen Depo-Provera lawsuits have been filed by women nationwide who say they developed brain tumors after receiving the birth control shot.

A panel of federal judges is being asked to consolidate and centralize all Depo-Provera lawsuits before one judge for coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings, since each of the claims allege that side effects of the birth control shot caused women to develop meningioma brain tumors.

Depo-Provera is a hormonal birth control shot approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1992, which contains medroxyprogesterone acetate, a synthetic form of the hormone progesterone. For decades, it has been advertised as a safe means of preventing pregnancy, which has been widely used by more than 70 million women in the U.S.

However, earlier this year, the findings of a study suggested a strong link between Depo-Provera and meningioma brain tumor side effects, indicating that women receiving the birth control shot may face a five fold greater risk of developing a meningioma, which can be life-threatening and often requires surgical intervention.

As a result, a growing number of women are now pursuing product liability lawsuits in U.S. District Courts nationwide, each raising similar allegations that they may have avoided the brain tumor if the drug makers had provided warnings for users and the medical community.

On November 26, nearly a dozen plaintiffs joined together to file a motion for transfer (PDF) with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML), calling for cases currently pending throughout the federal court system to all be centralized in the Northern District of California, as part of a Depo-Provera multidistrict litigation, or MDL.

The plaintiffs point out that there are common questions of fact and law raised in each of their complaints, and it is widely expected that the size and scope of the litigation will increase dramatically in the coming weeks and months. Therefore, the motion argues that establishing an MDL will help prevent duplicative discovery into common issues in the lawsuits, avoid contradicting rulings from different judges, and will serve the convenience of all parties, witnesses and the court system.

Such consolidation is common in the federal court system in complex product liability lawsuits, where large numbers of cases are pending before different judges that involve similar injuries or damages caused by the same product.

According to the motion, at least 22 Depo-Provera lawsuits have been filed in eight different district courts, with six of those pending in the Northern District of California, each raising nearly identical allegations.

“The pending cases allege plaintiffs were prescribed and administered quarterly injections of Depo-Provera, a high-dose progestin, commonly referred to as ‘the shot’ for contraception and developed meningioma, a brain tumor,” the motion states. “Most of the plaintiffs who have filed suit underwent intracranial surgery, with many women being left with seizure disorders, vision loss, and other permanent neurological injuries.”

If the JPML agrees to consolidate the lawsuits into a Depo-Provera MDL, all current and future claims will be transferred to one judge for coordinated discovery, pre-trial motions, and potentially a series of early bellwether test cases. However, if the parties fail to reach Depo-Provera brain tumor settlements or another resolution for the litigation after all pretrial proceedings are concluded, each individual lawsuit may later be remanded back to the U.S. District Court where it was initially filed for an individual trial in the future.