Attorney Jessie Paluch, founder of TruLaw, has over 25 years of experience as a personal injury and mass tort attorney, and previously worked as an international tax attorney at Deloitte. Jessie collaborates with attorneys nationwide — enabling her to share reliable, up-to-date legal information with our readers.
This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy and clarity by the team of writers and legal experts at TruLaw and is as accurate as possible. This content should not be taken as legal advice from an attorney. If you would like to learn more about our owner and experienced injury lawyer, Jessie Paluch, you can do so here.
TruLaw does everything possible to make sure the information in this article is up to date and accurate. If you need specific legal advice about your case, contact us by using the chat on the bottom of this page. This article should not be taken as advice from an attorney.
The Cooper Surgical IVF lawsuit stems from claims that the company’s embryo culture media was defective due to a lack of essential nutrients, which led to the destruction of viable embryos during IVF procedures.
This issue led to a recall in December 2023 after impacting over 20,000 families worldwide.
On this page, we’ll provide an overview of CooperSurgical IVF lawsuits, details of the CooperSurgical defective IVF solution recall, legal claims in the lawsuits against CooperSurgical, and much more.
Lawyers are actively filing claims to address these grievances, focusing on recovering losses related to emotional distress and medical expenses.
The lawsuits filed against CooperSurgical focus on claims that their defective embryo culture media caused significant harm during IVF procedures.
Plaintiff allegations in the CooperSurgical IVF lawsuits include, but are not limited to:
CooperSurgical initially communicated the recall to fertility clinics, instructing them to cease using the affected lots.
However, this recall notice was not promptly or broadly publicized to the public, leaving many patients unaware of the potential impact on their fertility treatments.
If you or a loved one has suffered embryo loss or other complications after undergoing IVF treatment with CooperSurgical’s defective embryo culture media, you may be eligible to seek compensation.
Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and determine if you qualify to file a CooperSurgical IVF lawsuit.
Assisted reproductive technology (ART) is essential in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures, with IVF being a key component of ART.
Embryo culture media provides a supportive environment for embryos to develop outside the human body.
This nutrient-rich solution simulates conditions within the human body to help embryos grow successfully during early stages.
For families pursuing IVF, the quality and composition of embryo culture media directly impact the success of the treatment and the viability of embryos.
Given the emotional, physical, and financial investments involved in IVF, any deficiencies in the culture media can lead to heartbreaking consequences, as seen in the Cooper Surgical case.
Embryo culture media is a carefully balanced, nutrient-rich solution for embryo growth during the IVF process.
An important component of this process is the embryo culture solution, which has recently been under scrutiny due to lawsuits against CooperSurgical, highlighting its significance and the potential impact of its recall on affected families.
This media replicates the essential nutrients found in a natural biological environment to foster healthy embryo development.
It typically includes minerals, amino acids, vitamins, and other nutrients that support cell division and embryo stability.
If embryo culture media lacks the necessary nutrients, embryos face a higher risk of failing to develop, leading to a significant loss of potential pregnancies.
Fertility clinics and IVF specialists rely on the safety and quality of these products, as even minor deficiencies can compromise the entire IVF cycle, leaving families with emotional and financial burdens.
Key roles of embryo culture media in supporting fertility treatments include:
Embryo culture media’s role in fertility treatments emphasizes the need for stringent quality control by manufacturers.
Families undergoing IVF are placing their trust in these products, hoping for the chance to grow their families.
A failure in product integrity, such as the Cooper Surgical recall, demonstrates the severe repercussions when these critical standards are not met.
The effect of nutritional deficiencies on embryo development is both immediate and profound, as embryos depend heavily on specific nutrients during early growth stages.
Concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of products like the embryo culture medium used in fertility treatments have been raised, with evidence of lawsuits and warnings associated with CooperSurgical’s embryo culture media.
Nutritional components such as magnesium are critical for cell division and DNA synthesis, which are fundamental to embryos’ early viability.
In the Cooper Surgical case, the absence of adequate magnesium in the embryo culture media contributed to the failure of embryos to develop properly, ultimately leading to nonviable embryos and unsuccessful IVF cycles.
These deficiencies not only hinder successful fertilization but also lead to significant emotional distress and financial losses for affected families.
Nutritional deficiencies in embryo culture media can manifest in several adverse ways:
The Cooper Surgical IVF case serves as a stark reminder of the devastating impact that nutritional deficiencies can have on embryo development.
For families placing their hopes in IVF, the assurance of safe, well-formulated culture media is paramount.
The consequences of defective products underline the necessity for stringent testing and transparency from manufacturers to protect both the physical and emotional investments of families pursuing fertility treatments.
The CooperSurgical IVF product defect and subsequent recall have sent shockwaves through the fertility community.
This product defect, involving a specific IVF solution with a critical magnesium deficiency in CooperSurgical’s embryo culture media, compromised the success of IVF treatments for thousands of patients worldwide.
The defective media, distributed under the LifeGlobal brand, was missing essential nutrients that are vital for early embryo development, leading to widespread embryo loss and halted IVF cycles.
The December 2023 recall highlighted significant issues not only in the product itself but also in CooperSurgical’s handling of the recall process, which has since drawn widespread criticism from affected families and the medical community.
The magnesium deficiency in CooperSurgical’s culture medium was discovered due to clinical and laboratory reports indicating failures in embryo development.
Magnesium is an essential nutrient required for healthy cellular division and DNA synthesis, both of which are critical for embryos’ development during the early stages of IVF.
The deficiency in magnesium led to adverse outcomes, including nonviable embryos and failed IVF cycles for many families.
Although this deficiency was severe enough to warrant immediate action, the timeline of CooperSurgical’s response has been heavily scrutinized.
The initial discovery pointed to significant issues with the formulation of the embryo culture media, suggesting a lapse in product quality control, which allowed defective media to reach fertility clinics across the globe.
The discovery of this nutrient deficiency raised several concerns:
The discovery of the magnesium deficiency in CooperSurgical’s culture media underscores the importance of rigorous quality checks to prevent such failures in highly sensitive medical products.
The December 2023 recall was issued by CooperSurgical following confirmation that its LifeGlobal-branded embryo culture media was missing essential nutrients, specifically magnesium.
This recall had a significant impact on IVF clinics, as the defective media led to numerous embryo failures, causing widespread disruption.
The recall affected approximately 20,000 IVF patients worldwide, with the defective media having been distributed to fertility clinics globally.
Despite the urgent nature of this defect, CooperSurgical’s approach to the recall was criticized as slow and limited, initially notifying only the fertility clinics rather than making a broad, public announcement.
This approach resulted in many patients unknowingly using the affected media, further heightening the scope of impact.
Key aspects of the recall’s scope and timeline include:
The December 2023 recall of CooperSurgical’s IVF culture media underscores the vital need for timely transparency when product defects are discovered.
With lives and family dreams at stake, prompt communication could have mitigated further losses, protecting patients from the devastating consequences of using a defective product during such a critical time.
The CooperSurgical IVF lawsuit has brought to light the immense impact that the company’s defective embryo culture media has had on families who entrusted their hopes and dreams to the IVF procedure.
IVF treatments are often seen as a last resort for families seeking to build their families, involving significant emotional and financial investment.
For many families affected by the defect in CooperSurgical’s media, the resulting embryo loss has not only shattered their plans but also introduced lasting emotional and financial burdens.
This section will delve into the emotional, psychological, and financial ramifications that families have faced in the wake of this devastating product defect.
The emotional and psychological toll of embryo loss due to defective IVF media is profound, as patients invest emotionally in each cycle and the potential for a successful pregnancy.
Patients who undergo IVF often endure repeated treatments, each with its own physical and emotional challenges.
With the knowledge that the CooperSurgical culture media lacked essential nutrients, families are left to grapple with feelings of loss, frustration, and betrayal.
The devastation of losing potential pregnancies due to a defective product, rather than natural complications, can lead to increased stress, anxiety, and depression.
The emotional and psychological effects on affected patients include:
For families who have endured the ups and downs of IVF only to face failure due to a preventable defect, the emotional aftermath can be particularly isolating.
The financial impact of failed IVF cycles due to CooperSurgical’s defective culture media adds a heavy burden on top of the emotional toll.
IVF is an expensive process, with each cycle costing thousands of dollars.
When a product defect causes an entire cycle to fail, families are left not only with financial losses from that cycle but also with the prospect of spending even more to repeat the process.
For many, these costs are financially crippling, especially since insurance coverage for fertility treatments is often limited or unavailable.
The financial losses faced by families due to the defective IVF media include:
The financial loss for affected families amplifies the distress and frustration caused by the defective media.
These costs, combined with the emotional toll of failed treatments, underscore the profound impact that CooperSurgical’s product defect has had on families.
As families seek justice through legal action, they hope to regain some stability and pursue their dreams of growing their families without bearing the financial and emotional scars left by this tragic incident.
The lawsuits filed against CooperSurgical over the defective embryo culture media are built on a range of serious legal claims, each aiming to hold the company accountable for the harm caused to thousands of patients worldwide.
The central claims revolve around negligence, product defects, and CooperSurgical’s failure to adequately inform both patients and clinics about the risks posed by the defective media.
These allegations argue that CooperSurgical’s actions, and in some cases lack of action, directly resulted in emotional distress, financial loss, and compromised IVF treatments for affected families.
The following sections outline the legal theories underpinning these claims and the potential grounds for compensation for the families involved.
One of the primary allegations in the lawsuits against CooperSurgical is negligence.
Plaintiffs argue that CooperSurgical failed to properly design, test, and ensure the safety of its embryo culture media before distributing it to fertility clinics globally.
Negligence claims highlight that, as a medical product manufacturer, CooperSurgical had a duty to prioritize patient safety through rigorous product testing and quality assurance.
The defective media, which lacked essential nutrients like magnesium, ultimately led to the failure of embryo development for numerous patients, thereby undermining the entire IVF treatment.
Key components of the negligence and product defect allegations include:
The negligence and product defect allegations are pivotal in establishing CooperSurgical’s accountability in this case.
These claims emphasize that the company had a fundamental responsibility to ensure that its products were safe for one of the most sensitive medical procedures, and their failure to do so has led to lasting consequences for affected families.
Another critical element in the lawsuits is the assertion that CooperSurgical failed to properly warn patients and fertility clinics about the risks associated with the defective media.
Plaintiffs argue that CooperSurgical knew, or should have known, about the nutrient deficiencies in its embryo culture media and the potential harm it posed to IVF treatments.
Despite these concerns, the company’s recall notice was initially limited to fertility clinics and was not broadly communicated to the public, leaving many patients unaware of the defect and continuing to use the product during critical IVF cycles.
The failure to warn claims involve the following arguments:
The failure to warn claims underscore the importance of transparency and communication in the medical field, particularly when patient health and emotional well-being are on the line.
By allegedly withholding critical information, CooperSurgical’s actions not only exposed families to additional harm but also damaged the trust that patients have in medical product manufacturers.
These claims form a central basis of the legal actions, as affected families seek accountability and compensation for the damages they have suffered due to the defective product.
The lawsuits filed against CooperSurgical by families affected by the defective embryo culture media involve multiple legal theories to address the various types of harm suffered.
In addition to negligence and failure to warn, the lawsuits rest on complex legal theories such as strict product liability, trespass to chattels, and unjust enrichment.
Each theory highlights different aspects of CooperSurgical’s alleged responsibility and emphasizes the extensive damages that affected families are seeking to recover.
Understanding these legal foundations is essential to grasping the arguments made in the lawsuits and the potential outcomes for affected families.
Strict product liability is one of the key legal theories in the lawsuits against CooperSurgical.
Under this theory, plaintiffs argue that CooperSurgical should be held responsible for the harm caused by its defective embryo culture media, regardless of the company’s intent or knowledge of the defect.
Strict product liability does not require proof of negligence but rather focuses on the inherent defectiveness of the product itself.
Plaintiffs allege that CooperSurgical’s media lacked critical nutrients necessary for embryo development, thereby classifying it as a defective product unfit for its intended purpose.
The strict product liability claim includes the following arguments:
Strict product liability is a powerful claim because it holds CooperSurgical accountable for the product’s defect regardless of intent.
By focusing on the harm caused, strict liability strengthens the case for plaintiffs seeking compensation, arguing that the product’s failure alone is sufficient for CooperSurgical’s responsibility.
The lawsuits against CooperSurgical also include unique legal claims such as trespass to chattels and unjust enrichment.
Although these theories are less common in product liability cases, they underscore the significant emotional and financial harm CooperSurgical allegedly caused to families affected by the defective media.
Trespass to chattels focuses on the notion that CooperSurgical’s defective media unlawfully interfered with patients’ personal property—in this case, their embryos.
Meanwhile, the claim of unjust enrichment argues that CooperSurgical profited from the sale of the defective media at the expense of families who suffered losses.
Key points of the trespass to chattels and unjust enrichment claims include:
These legal theories broaden the scope of the lawsuits by addressing not only the defective product itself but also the broader ethical implications of CooperSurgical’s actions.
By incorporating trespass to chattels and unjust enrichment claims, plaintiffs assert their right to compensation for the personal and financial intrusions caused by the defective media.
These theories amplify the argument that CooperSurgical’s actions warrant accountability and restitution, seeking justice for the full extent of the harm experienced by affected families.
The plaintiffs in the CooperSurgical IVF lawsuits are seeking comprehensive compensation for the wide-ranging emotional, financial, and medical damages they have experienced as a result of the defective embryo culture media.
Families who trusted CooperSurgical’s product during their IVF treatments are now pursuing justice not only for the emotional anguish but also for the financial burdens caused by failed IVF cycles.
Given the high costs and emotional investment associated with fertility treatments, the lawsuits aim to secure compensation that addresses both immediate and long-term impacts.
Below, we outline the types of damages sought by plaintiffs, with a focus on emotional distress, financial losses, medical expenses, and anticipated future IVF costs.
The emotional and financial losses experienced by affected families are substantial.
Many families endured failed IVF cycles and the loss of potential pregnancies due to the defective media, resulting in significant grief and distress.
Plaintiffs are seeking compensation for these non-economic damages alongside the financial strain of unsuccessful treatments and related expenses.
This aspect of the lawsuit highlights the deep impact that defective medical products can have on patients’ mental health and financial stability.
The types of compensation sought for emotional and financial losses include:
The range of damages sought underscores the broad impact of the CooperSurgical defect, with plaintiffs requesting compensation that reflects the severe emotional and financial toll they endured due to the faulty product.
In addition to emotional and financial compensation, plaintiffs are seeking to recover the significant medical expenses incurred as a result of failed IVF treatments caused by the defective media.
IVF is a costly procedure, and each cycle can involve extensive medical bills that include testing, medications, lab fees, and specialist care.
For families affected by the defective product, the need for repeat treatments amplifies these costs, adding to the overall financial burden.
Additionally, plaintiffs are requesting compensation for future IVF cycles, recognizing that many families will need to undergo additional treatments to achieve their dreams of parenthood.
The medical expenses and future IVF costs that plaintiffs seek include:
The medical and future IVF-related expenses are central to the financial compensation sought in this lawsuit.
Plaintiffs are arguing that, given CooperSurgical’s defective product, the company should bear the financial responsibility for both past failed treatments and any additional cycles required in the future.
This approach aims to relieve affected families of the financial burden of repeated IVF treatments, allowing them to continue their fertility journey without incurring further personal financial strain.
CooperSurgical IVF lawsuits are being filed by individuals across the country who were affected by the company’s recalled products used in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments.
TruLaw is currently accepting clients for the CooperSurgical IVF lawsuit.
A few reasons to choose TruLaw for your CooperSurgical IVF lawsuit include:
If you or a loved one have been affected by CooperSurgical’s recalled IVF products, you may be eligible to seek compensation.
Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation that can determine if you qualify to file a claim in the CooperSurgical IVF lawsuit today.
No, there is not currently a class action lawsuit filed against CooperSurgical for IVF.
The CooperSurgical IVF lawsuit claims are currently organized as individual cases rather than class action but may be consolidated into multi-district litigation (MDL).
The recall was initiated in December 2023 due to defective embryo culture media that lacked essential nutrients, particularly magnesium.
This deficiency led to widespread embryo loss and failed IVF treatments, affecting approximately 20,000 families worldwide.
The lawsuits primarily focus on product liability, negligence, and failure to warn claims against CooperSurgical.
Plaintiffs allege the company failed to properly test their products and adequately inform patients and clinics about the risks of their defective embryo culture media.
A single failed IVF cycle can cost between $12,000 to $15,000 or more in medical expenses.
Affected families are seeking compensation for both failed treatments and the costs of future IVF attempts through the CooperSurgical lawsuit.
Affected families can pursue compensation for emotional distress, failed IVF treatment costs, future medical expenses, and mental health care.
The lawsuit aims to recover economic and non-economic damages related to the defective embryo culture media.
TruLaw operates on a contingency fee basis, meaning clients only pay if they win their case.
We offer expertise in product liability cases and has helped clients recover billions in compensation through verdicts and settlements.
Embryo culture media provides essential nutrients and creates a supportive environment for embryo development during IVF procedures.
The media is essential for successful embryo growth, containing minerals, amino acids, and vitamins that simulate natural biological conditions.
Experienced Attorney & Legal SaaS CEO
With over 25 years of legal experience, Jessie is an Illinois lawyer, a CPA, and a mother of three. She spent the first decade of her career working as an international tax attorney at Deloitte.
In 2009, Jessie co-founded her own law firm with her husband – which has scaled to over 30 employees since its conception.
In 2016, Jessie founded TruLaw, which allows her to collaborate with attorneys and legal experts across the United States on a daily basis. This hypervaluable network of experts is what enables her to share reliable legal information with her readers!
You can learn more about the CooperSurgical IVF Lawsuit by visiting any of our pages listed below:
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
At TruLaw, we fiercely combat corporations that endanger individuals’ well-being. If you’ve suffered injuries and believe these well-funded entities should be held accountable, we’re here for you.
With TruLaw, you gain access to successful and seasoned lawyers who maximize your chances of success. Our lawyers invest in you—they do not receive a dime until your lawsuit reaches a successful resolution!
Do you believe you’re entitled to compensation?
Use our Instant Case Evaluator to find out in as little as 60 seconds!
AFFF Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), commonly used in firefighting.
Claims allege that companies such as 3M, DuPont, and Tyco Fire Products failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of AFFF exposure — including increased risks of various cancers and diseases.
Suboxone Tooth Decay Lawsuit claims are being filed against Indivior, the manufacturer of Suboxone, a medication used to treat opioid addiction.
Claims allege that Indivior failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of severe tooth decay and dental injuries associated with Suboxone’s sublingual film version.
Social Media Harm Lawsuits are being filed against social media companies for allegedly causing mental health issues in children and teens.
Claims allege that companies like Meta, Google, ByteDance, and Snap designed addictive platforms that led to anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues without adequately warning users or parents.
Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits are being filed against manufacturers of transvaginal mesh products used to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI).
Claims allege that companies like Ethicon, C.R. Bard, and Boston Scientific failed to adequately warn about potential dangers — including erosion, pain, and infection.
Bair Hugger Warming Blanket Lawsuits involve claims against 3M — alleging their surgical warming blankets caused severe infections and complications (particularly in hip and knee replacement surgeries).
Plaintiffs claim 3M failed to warn about potential risks — despite knowing about increased risk of deep joint infections since 2011.
Baby Formula NEC Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of cow’s milk-based baby formula products.
Claims allege that companies like Abbott Laboratories (Similac) and Mead Johnson & Company (Enfamil) failed to warn about the increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants.
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?