Court Urged To Reject Motion To Dismiss Lawsuits Over Ozempic, Mounjaro Gastrointestinal Risks

Plaintiffs indicate Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly have consistently overstated the benefits of GLP-1 medications, while understating potential risks for users.

Plaintiffs involved in lawsuits over the side effects of popular diabetes and weight loss drugs, like Ozempic, Wegovy and Mounjaro, are urging the U.S. District Judge presiding over the litigation to reject a motion filed by the drug makers to dismiss claims.

Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly face more than 1,500 Ozempic lawsuits, Wegovy lawsuits, Mounjaro lawsuits and other claims involving users of a new class of medications, known as glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, which are widely used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and for weight loss.

All of the claims raise similar allegations that the drug makers knew or should have known that their drugs put users at increased risk of potentially life-threatening gastrointestinal side effects, such as gastroparesis (stomach paralysis), ileus and intestinal obstruction.

Instead of warning patients and the medical community, the lawsuits claim the manufacturers put profits ahead of consumer safety.

Given common questions of fact and law raised in complaints brought throughout the federal court system, all GLP-1 lawsuits have been centralized as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, where they are currently being overseen by U.S. District Judge Karen Marston.

However, in January the manufacturers filed a motion to dismiss, urging Judge Marston to throw out nearly all counts contained in a Master Complaint submitted by plaintiffs’ attorneys in November 2024. The motion claimed plaintiffs have failed to present valid claims on almost everything except their Failure to Warn allegations, which will be addressed by the Court at a later date.

On March 18, plaintiffs filed a response (PDF) with the Court, urging Judge Marston to reject the motion.

“Over the course of the past ten years, Defendants have transformed GLP-1 RAs from a novel medication approved for limited indications related to the treatment of diabetes to one of the most profitable drugs ever to reach market, drawing in countless patients with a promise of being a ‘magic pill’ for weight loss,” the response states. “Defendants’ rapid expansion of the market for GLP-1 RAs has had drastic results, growing the patient base to include many patients who would be better served choosing alternate treatments paths, whether competing diabetes medications or other weight-loss approaches, and who not only end up experiencing little to no clinical benefit from the drugs but also suffer significant injuries.”

The response indicates that the manufacturers’ conduct validates the plaintiffs’ claims for relief that go beyond Failure to Warn charges, indicating that facts alleged in the complaint detail how Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly are also liable for breach of warranty, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, design defect, negligence and other claims.

“Underlying this scheme was Defendants’ consistent overstatement of the benefits and their downplaying of the risks of taking GLP-1 RAs. Ignoring a large swath of Plaintiffs’ allegations and their import, Defendants, throughout their Brief, assert that the Complaint ‘focus[es] principally on allegations that [Novo and Lilly] failed to adequately warn of certain side effects,’” plaintiffs argue. “On the contrary, in addition to setting forth in detail the substantial evidence showing that Defendants were on notice that GLP-1 RAs caused significant injuries yet intentionally withheld that information from patients, their doctors, and the public; the Complaint alleges in detail Defendants’ expensive and elaborate scheme, including a pervasive and comprehensive marketing campaign, to directly impact the behavior of patients and change physician prescribing habits.”

March 2025 GLP-1 Lawsuits Update

If the lawsuits are cleared to move forward after the motion to dismiss, the court still has to resolve certain “cross-cutting” issues, including whether claims are preempted by federal law, whether plaintiffs are required to present specific diagnostic testing evidence to substantiate their injuries, and whether there is sufficient general causation evidence linking Ozempic and the gastrointestinal injuries

Once those factors are resolved, Judge Marston is expected to move forward with scheduling a series of early bellwether trials, which will test how juries may respond to certain evidence and testimony that may be repeated throughout thousands of individual claims.

While the outcomes of these early test cases will not be binding on other claims, they will be closely watched and may help the parties negotiate GLP-1 settlements to resolve large numbers of lawsuits in the future.