July 14, 2020 – Three new lawsuits alleging that Paragard is defective and causes severe complications and injuries were filed against Teva Pharmaceuticals.
The first lawsuit, a ten-count complaint, was filed on May 11, 2020 in the US District Court for the Eastern District of California. As of July 14, 2020, the case was before Magistrate Judge William B. Shubb. Notable claims were negligence, strict liability design defect, strict liability manufacturing defect, and strict liability failure to warn. In her lawsuit, the plaintiff reported that she had the Paragard IUD for approximately two years after its implantation before she requested for its removal. Her doctor removed the IUD following the manufacturer’s instructions to find one arm of the device gone, which then required the doctor to search and recover the part via a hysteroscope.
The second lawsuit was filed on May 26, 2020, in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. As of July 14, 2020, the case was before Judge Gregory H. Woods. Notable claims were negligence, design defect, and manufacturing defect. The second plaintiff had the Paragard IUD for approximately five years after its implantation before she experienced uterine pain.
Similar to the first plaintiff, the second plaintiff requested for the IUD to be removed only for the doctor to find that it was missing an arm when they removed it. The plaintiff claimed that Teva Pharmaceuticals “knew or should have known that Paragard can and does cause serious harm to individuals who use it, due to the risk of the Paragard’s arm breaking upon removal.”
The third lawsuit, an eleven-count complaint, was filed on May 28, 2020, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois in the East St. Louis Division. As of July 14, 2020, the case was before Judge J. Phil Gilbert after being reassigned to him on June 24, 2020. Notable claims were negligence, failure to warn, violation of consumer protection laws, and gross negligence. The plaintiff was implanted with the Paragard IUD in 2008. In 2018, when her doctor attempted to remove the device according to Teva’s instructions, the device was missing an arm. The plaintiff underwent two procedures before the device was successfully removed. The plaintiff claims that “Paragard is inherently dangerous and defective, unfit and unsafe for its intended use.”
All three plaintiffs claim that they were in good health when the Paragard IUD was implanted. When the IUD broke off while inside each plaintiff, they all required invasive procedures to remove the fragments. The plaintiffs allege that Teva Pharmaceuticals was aware of the dangers of the Paragard device and failed to warn the public about its risks. No trial date has been set in any of the three cases, yet they clearly depict the need for justice in the lives of those consumers who were burdened with serious injuries from their Paragard IUDs.
Reference: “Paragard IUD Alleged to Cause Serious Injuries.” The National Law Review, www.natlawreview.com/article/paragard-iud-alleged-to-cause-serious-injuries.