Pfizer Agrees Brain Tumor Lawsuits Over Depo-Provera Should Be Centralized in MDL

While the manufacturer of the birth control shot agrees that a federal Depo-Provera multidistrict litigation (MDL) should be created, it disagrees with plaintiffs about where the cases should be centralized.

As a growing number of brain tumor lawsuits continue to be filed throughout the federal court system by former users of Depo-Provera, Pfizer indicates that it agrees with plaintiffs that all litigation over the birth control shots should be consolidated before one judge for coordinated pretrial proceedings. However, the drug maker disagrees about where the cases should be centralized.

Depo-Provera is a hormonal birth control shot containing medroxyprogesterone acetate, a synthetic form of the hormone progesterone, which was first introduced in 1992, as a quarterly injection administered by a healthcare provider to prevent pregnancy.

The birth control shot has become a popular choice for approximately 70 million women, since it only requires four birth control shots per year and is thought to carry few, if any, serious side effects. However, in March a study linked Depo-Provera to increased brain tumor risks, indicating women injected with the birth control shot face a risk five times greater than their peers of developing a meningioma.

There are now dozens of women pursuing Depo-Provera brain tumor lawsuits in U.S. District Courts nationwide, each raising similar allegations that they may have avoided a meningioma diagnosis if the drug makers had adequately warned patients and the medical community.

As a result of common questions raised in the lawsuits, a group of plaintiffs filed a petition with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) earlier this year, asking that the claims be consolidated in the Northern District of California, as part of a Depo-Provera lawsuit MDL.

In their Depo-Provera MDL petition, submitted last month, plaintiffs noted each of the complaints raise nearly identical allegations, and it is widely expected that the size and scope of the litigation will increase dramatically in the coming weeks and months. Thus, plaintiffs argue that establishing an MDL will help prevent duplicative discovery into common issues in the lawsuits, avoid contradictory rulings and serve the convenience of all parties, witnesses and the court system.

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

According to plaintiffs, 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, which they propose is the most appropriate venue to centralize all discovery and pretrial proceedings.

In a response (PDF) filed on December 23, Pfizer agreed with the need for a Depo-Provera MDL. However, the manufacturer disagreed with California being the venue of choice, indicating that the lawsuits should be transferred to New York City, where their corporate headquarters are located.

“Pfizer agrees that these cases should be centralized into an MDL; the question is the location of the transferee court. The litigation is almost certain to be complex and hard-fought— Pfizer (the parent company of Pharmacia and Pharmacia & Upjohn) and the other defendants will vigorously defend the medicine’s safety and efficacy,” Pfizer’s response states. “Under these circumstances, the Southern District of New York is the most appropriate forum for centralization.”

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.