Depo Provera Lawsuit

Published By:
Jessica Paluch-Hoerman
Jessica Paluch-Hoerman

Attorney Jessica Paluch-Hoerman, founder of TruLaw, has over 28 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.

Key takeaways:

  • A March 2024 British Medical Journal study revealed that women using Depo-Provera for more than one year face a 5.6-fold increased risk of developing meningiomas (brain tumors), yet Pfizer has failed to update warning labels for U.S. consumers despite adding these warnings in Europe and the UK.
  • If successful, Women who have received at least two Depo-Provera injections and were subsequently diagnosed with intracranial meningiomas may be eligible for compensation ranging from $100,000 or more depending on tumor severity and treatment requirements.
  • Over 290 Depo-Provera lawsuits have been consolidated into federal multidistrict litigation (MDL 3140) under Judge M. Casey Rodgers, with bellwether trials scheduled for late 2026 and potential global settlement discussions expected to begin by 2027-2028.

What is the Depo Provera Lawsuit?

Question: What is the Depo Provera lawsuit?

Answer: The Depo Provera lawsuit is an active litigation against Pfizer Inc. and other pharmaceutical companies, alleging that the contraceptive injection Depo-Provera causes brain tumors called meningiomas in women who use it long-term.

Our law firm is actively assisting individuals with Depo Provera lawsuit claims across all fifty (50) states in the United States.

This page provides the most recent news and updates on the Depo Provera brain tumor lawsuit and expert insights on potential settlement amounts that plaintiffs with Depo Provera meningioma lawsuits could receive.

You will not get more updated news on the depo shot lawsuit anywhere else.

On this page, we’ll provide an overview of the Depo Provera lawsuit, eligibility criteria for filing a Depo Provera lawsuit, meningioma brain tumors associated with Depo-Provera, and much more.

Depo Provera Lawsuit Display Image; Depo-Provera Lawsuit Display Image
Play Video

Lawyers Investigating Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuit Claims

Depo Provera lawsuits claim that Pfizer failed to adequately warn patients and doctors about the increased risk of developing these potentially life-threatening brain tumors, despite having scientific evidence linking the drug’s active ingredient, medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), to meningiomas for decades.

Women who used Depo-Provera injections and subsequently developed brain tumors are filing product liability and failure-to-warn claims, seeking compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other damages related to their diagnoses.

The legal actions assert that while Pfizer updated warning labels in Europe and the UK to reflect these brain tumor risks, they failed to provide similar warnings to women in the United States, leaving patients uninformed about the serious neurological complications that can result from prolonged use of the birth control shot.

If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with meningioma (brain tumors) after using Depo-Provera injectable birth control, you may qualify to seek compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation that can determine your eligibility to join others in filing a Depo-Provera brain tumor lawsuit today.

Table of Contents
Depo Provera Lawsuit; How Can A Depo Provera Lawsuit Attorney from TruLaw Help You; The Risks of Depo-Provera Usage; Scientific Studies Linking Depo-Provera to Brain Tumors; Historical Warnings and Pfizer’s Knowledge of Risks; Meningioma Brain Tumors Associated with Depo-Provera; Product Liability Claims Against Pfizer; Eligibility Criteria for Filing a Depo-Provera Lawsuit; Pfizer's Liability in Depo-Provera Cases; Factors Contributing to Pfizer’s Liability; Potential Settlement Amounts in Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuits; Overview of Depo Provera Birth Control Shot; Primary Health Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Types of Injuries and Conditions Associated with Depo Provera UsageHealth Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Current Status of the Depo Provera Litigation; Legal Theories and Claims Being Pursued in the Depo Provera Shot Lawsuit; Who Qualifies for a Depo Provera Lawsuit; The Legal Process_ What to Expect When Filing a Claim; Compensation Available in Depo Provera Lawsuits

Depo-Provera Lawsuit Updates

  • June 2025 Updates:

    June 16th, 2025: Generic Defendants Likely to Be Dismissed as Brand Cases Advance

    On June 11, U.S. District Judge M. Casey Rodgers issued a case management order in the Depo-Provera multidistrict litigation (MDL), signaling that generic manufacturers Greenstone, Viatris, and Prasco may soon be dismissed from the proceedings.

    This follows a May 30 case management conference where plaintiffs’ counsel indicated these companies are likely to be released pending further evaluation of their involvement.

    The MDL includes over 400 lawsuits alleging that Depo-Provera birth control injections caused meningioma brain tumors, and that Pfizer and other brand-name manufacturers failed to warn of this risk.

    More than 300 cases have been consolidated since March 2025.

    Discovery is currently underway, with deadlines for preemption and general causation document production having passed on May 11.

    Judge Rodgers confirmed that bellwether trials are expected to begin in late 2026 or early 2027 to test liability and help guide settlement discussions.

    June 12, 2025: Pfizer Seeks Dismissal of Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuits on Preemption Grounds

    On September 29, 2025, U.S. District Judge M. Casey Rodgers will hear arguments on Pfizer’s motion to dismiss more than 400 lawsuits in the Depo-Provera brain tumor multidistrict litigation (MDL).

    Pfizer is seeking dismissal based on federal preemption, claiming it cannot be held liable under state failure-to-warn laws because the FDA previously rejected a warning about brain tumor risks.

    According to Pfizer, federal law overrides any state requirement to include a warning the FDA did not approve.

    Plaintiffs counter that Pfizer has not met the legal threshold to invoke preemption and argue that drugmakers may still face liability when new evidence of danger becomes available.

    Recent studies linking Depo-Provera to increased risk of brain tumors are central to their position.

    The court’s ruling—expected in October—will decide whether the litigation proceeds into discovery or is stopped at this early stage.

    June 5th, 2025: Pfizer Seeks Mass Tort Program in Philadelphia Depo-Provera Cases

    Pfizer has formally petitioned the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas to establish a mass tort program to manage lawsuits alleging that its contraceptive injection, Depo-Provera, caused brain tumors.

    Although only two cases have been filed in Philadelphia so far, one includes claims from more than 100 plaintiffs.

    On May 30, nearly all of those claims were severed and dismissed without prejudice, allowing plaintiffs to refile individually.

    Pfizer anticipates a wave of new filings in the near future.

    The pharmaceutical giant argues that consolidating these cases under a mass tort program would improve efficiency and streamline proceedings.

    Legal experts note that the court’s decision could significantly influence how the Pennsylvania docket evolves moving forward.

    June 2nd, 2025: June 2025 JPML Update

    The Depo-Provera multidistrict litigation (MDL) added 59 new cases from May to June, increasing the total case count to 348.

    Lawyers are currently analyzing medical records and expert evaluations as preliminary discovery begins to define the central issues in the case.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be entitled to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit. 

    Our lawyers are accepting new clients for the Depo-Provera Lawsuit across the United States. 

    Contact our Depo-Provera Lawyers today for a free consultation, or use the chatbot on this page to instantly find out if you qualify for a claim.

  • May 2025 Updates:

    May 27, 2025: Lower-Dose Depo-SubQ 104 Gains Attention in Growing Brain Tumor Litigation

    As the Depo-Provera brain tumor litigation expands, a lower-dose version of the contraceptive—Depo-SubQ Provera 104—is drawing increased scrutiny.

    Legal and medical experts are questioning why this alternative, which may have posed fewer risks, was not more widely adopted.

    Developed by Pfizer, Depo-SubQ Provera 104 delivers 104 mg of medroxyprogesterone acetate via subcutaneous injection—significantly lower than the 150 mg intramuscular dose used in the standard Depo-Provera shot.

    Some medical experts believe the reduced hormone exposure from this formulation could have meaningfully decreased the risk of developing meningiomas, a type of non-cancerous brain tumor linked to long-term synthetic hormone use.

    The theory is that lower cumulative hormone levels may reduce hormone buildup in the body, thereby lessening the risk of tumor growth.

    However, attorneys for plaintiffs in the Depo-Provera multidistrict litigation (MDL) argue that Pfizer failed to adequately promote the lower-dose version, choosing instead to focus on the higher-dose product for market-driven reasons rather than patient safety.

    This growing focus on Depo-SubQ Provera 104 may play a significant role in the ongoing MDL, where thousands of women claim they developed brain tumors after receiving Depo-Provera injections.

    May 19, 2025: Depo-Provera Meningioma Study Adds Critical Evidence to Ongoing Lawsuits

    A newly published peer-reviewed study from February 2025 has added critical support to the claims at the center of the Depo-Provera brain tumor litigation.

    Researchers at the University of British Columbia conducted a large-scale, nested case-control study using U.S. insurance data to compare women who used Depo-Provera with those who used a standard oral contraceptive.

    The results were striking—women who used Depo-Provera for over one year were 3.5 times more likely to develop meningioma, a typically benign brain tumor.

    Importantly, the study addressed prior limitations in the research by including an active comparator group and controlling for the timing of tumor development.

    The risk increased over time, with adjusted incidence rate ratios of 2.95 after two years, 3.17 after three years, and 3.50 after four years of Depo-Provera use.

    Researchers pointed to a possible biological explanation: meningiomas often overexpress progesterone receptors—the same target affected by Depo-Provera’s mechanism of action.

    While the European Medicines Agency has already called for meningioma warnings on Depo-Provera’s label, the FDA has yet to require similar updates in the United States.

    The study is expected to play a central role in the ongoing Depo-Provera multidistrict litigation (MDL), where plaintiffs allege that Pfizer failed to adequately warn about long-term tumor risks.

    With more than a million prescriptions filled each year, these findings could significantly influence discovery and upcoming bellwether trials.

    May 1, 2025: Depo-Provera MDL Sees Surge in Cases as Litigation Accelerates

    The Depo-Provera multidistrict litigation (MDL) experienced its largest monthly increase to date, with 159 new cases added in April 2025.

    This surge reflects growing public awareness of the potential link between Depo-Provera and brain tumors such as meningiomas.

    The federal MDL is moving swiftly, with Judge M. Casey Rodgers actively managing proceedings to determine which defendants will remain in the case.

    The court has imposed strict deadlines and confirmed that early depositions will not be required at this stage, streamlining the discovery process as the litigation continues to expand.

  • April 2025 Updates:

    April 22nd, 2025: Depo-Provera MDL Gains Momentum as Court Clears Early Discovery Hurdles

    The Depo-Provera brain tumor multidistrict litigation (MDL) is steadily advancing under the leadership of U.S. District Judge M. Casey Rodgers.

    Recent court orders have addressed the involvement of generic manufacturers Greenstone, Viatris, and Prasco in the growing litigation.

    After initially missing deadlines, Greenstone and Viatris submitted court-required affidavits affirming their roles in distributing the birth control shot linked to brain tumors such as meningiomas.

    Judge Rodgers accepted the affidavits and ruled that early depositions are not necessary at this time, preserving plaintiffs’ rights to revisit the generics’ liability later.

    Attorneys representing plaintiffs are also finalizing a stipulation that could lead to Prasco’s dismissal from the MDL.

    Greenstone and Viatris, however, remain active defendants and must comply with discovery requests involving their product distribution practices.

    With thousands of women alleging brain tumors after Depo-Provera use, Judge Rodgers’ enforcement of deadlines and discovery procedures is keeping the litigation on track.

    The court has made clear that noncompliance will not be tolerated as the MDL continues to expand.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be entitled to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit. 

    Our lawyers are accepting new clients for the Depo-Provera Lawsuit across the United States. 

    Contact our Depo-Provera Lawyers today for a free consultation, or use the chatbot on this page to instantly find out if you qualify for a claim.

  • April 2025 Updates:

    April 8th, 2025: Federal Judge Schedules Monthly Conferences for Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuits

    The federal judge overseeing all Depo-Provera brain tumor lawsuits has scheduled monthly case management conferences through 2025, aimed at keeping the litigation on track for early bellwether trials.

    These lawsuits, centralized in a multidistrict litigation (MDL) before U.S. District Judge M. Casey Rodgers in the Northern District of Florida, involve claims that Pfizer and other manufacturers failed to warn about the risk of meningioma brain tumors linked to long-term use of the birth control injection.

    As of now, at least 130 cases have been filed, though that number is expected to grow significantly.

    In a proactive move, Judge Rodgers independently selected five pilot cases for early trials and is pushing both sides to make consistent progress.

    The next status conference is scheduled for May 30.

    While early trials may not begin until late 2026 or early 2027, their outcomes are expected to shape future settlement negotiations and influence the direction of thousands of similar claims.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be entitled to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit. 

    Our lawyers are accepting new clients for the Depo-Provera Lawsuit across the United States. 

    Contact our Depo-Provera Lawyers today for a free consultation, or use the chatbot on this page to instantly find out if you qualify for a claim.

    April 7th, 2025: Judge Enforces Deadlines in Depo-Provera MDL

    U.S. District Judge M. Casey Rodgers is taking a firm stance in the Depo-Provera brain tumor multidistrict litigation (MDL), issuing an Order to Show Cause after Greenstone and Viatris failed to meet a critical court deadline.

    Under Case Management Order No. 2, all generic drug manufacturers were required to file a Notice of Compliance within a specified timeframe.

    While Prasco met this requirement on time, Greenstone and Viatris missed the deadline.

    This prompted the judge to demand formal explanations from both companies, a move that underscores the importance of court compliance in complex litigation.

    Though Greenstone and Viatris eventually submitted affidavits confirming they did not manufacture the drug at issue, Judge Rodgers made clear that similar delays in the future will not be tolerated.

    The order signals the court’s commitment to maintaining efficiency and accountability as the Depo-Provera litigation advances.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be entitled to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit. 

    Our lawyers are accepting new clients for the Depo-Provera Lawsuit across the United States. 

    Contact our Depo-Provera Lawyers today for a free consultation, or use the chatbot on this page to instantly find out if you qualify for a claim.

    April 3rd, 2025: Court Implements New Procedure for Verifying Depo-Provera Use in Ongoing Litigation

    In the ongoing multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving Depo-Provera, a recent court order has introduced a structured process to help plaintiffs confirm their use of the medication. As part of the new requirements, individuals involved in the case must complete and submit a “Plaintiff Proof of Use/Injury Questionnaire” within 120 days of March 14, 2025—or within 120 days of filing, in the case of new claims.

    Recognizing that many plaintiffs may have received Depo-Provera injections years ago, making traditional medical records difficult to obtain, the court has approved a process to retrieve documentation from third parties. These third-party sources—such as pharmacies, healthcare providers, insurers, and military medical services—must supply any records that could verify medication use. Acceptable forms of evidence may include prescription purchase data, shipping information, or insurance claim records indicating administration of Depo-Provera or its generic equivalent, DMPA.

    To streamline the record-gathering process, the court has authorized the use of a standardized, HIPAA and HITECH-compliant release form, along with a provider identification form. If a provider does not respond voluntarily, plaintiffs’ attorneys are permitted to issue subpoenas without facing procedural delays.

    Importantly, third-party entities are required to comply with these subpoenas or requests without placing undue barriers on plaintiffs. The order prohibits unnecessary demands such as exclusive proprietary forms, original signature requirements, or excessive processing fees that could hinder access to needed records.

    Overall, the directive is aimed at improving the efficiency and fairness of the litigation process by making it easier for plaintiffs to access vital proof of medication usage—particularly in cases where older records may be hard to retrieve.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    April 1st, 2025: Court Order Establishes Process for Depo-Provera Proof-of-Use Evidence

    A new court order in the Depo-Provera multidistrict litigation (MDL) has established a clear process for plaintiffs to verify their medication history.

    Plaintiffs must now submit a “Plaintiff Proof of Use/Injury Questionnaire” within 120 days of March 14, 2025, or within 120 days of filing for new cases.

    To help confirm whether a person received Depo-Provera or its generic version, DMPA, the court approved a process for retrieving third-party records.

    Since many plaintiffs were treated years ago, traditional medical records may be incomplete or unavailable.

    The order allows for alternative forms of verification, including pharmacy logs, shipping records, and insurance payments.

    Plaintiffs may use standardized HIPAA and HITECH-compliant release forms, along with a provider identification form, to request documentation.

    If a provider refuses to comply, legal teams may issue subpoenas without added obstacles.

    The order also blocks third parties from requiring proprietary forms, original signatures, or excessive fees.

    This procedural change makes it easier for plaintiffs to gather the records needed to support their claims, ensuring a more efficient and fair litigation process.

    Additionally, the Depo-Provera Lawsuit experienced a significant increase in new filings between March and April 2025.

    Between February and March, the litigation saw 78 new cases filed.

    By April 1st, the number of Depo-Provera Lawsuits pending surged to 130, an increase of 52 new cases.

    This notable rise in filings reflects growing attention to the potential risks associated with Depo-Provera, particularly in relation to claims of brain tumor risk linked to its use.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly

  • March 2025 Updates:

    March 18th, 2025: Depo-Provera Lawsuits Move Forward with Direct Filing in MDL

    The Depo-Provera Lawsuit is ongoing.

    Judge M. Casey Rodgers, who oversees the federal Depo-Provera multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Northern District of Florida, has issued a case management order allowing plaintiffs to file their lawsuits directly into the MDL.

    This move is expected to significantly streamline the litigation process as more women come forward with claims against the makers of the birth control shot.

    The lawsuits allege that Depo-Provera increases the risk of meningioma, a type of benign brain tumor, and that manufacturers failed to adequately warn both patients and healthcare providers.

    Unlike many other MDLs, the court will not require a master complaint, short-form complaints, or a Science Day, determining that these steps are unnecessary for the litigation at this time.

    Judge Rodgers has also appointed 63 attorneys to leadership roles, assigning them responsibilities over discovery, expert coordination, and trial preparation.

    Five pilot cases have already been selected for early bellwether trials, which could help shape the direction of future proceedings.

    The court has launched an official MDL webpage for public access to case updates, and the date of the next status conference is expected to be announced soon.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly

    March 12th, 2025: Depo-Provera MDL Advances with Key Developments

    The multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving Depo-Provera is moving forward under the oversight of Judge Rodgers.

    Both parties have established a structured case management plan, streamlining the legal process.

    Plaintiffs now have the ability to file claims directly into the MDL, helping to accelerate case progression.

    A pilot case schedule has been implemented, outlining deadlines for amendments to complaints, discovery procedures, expert witness disclosures, and dispositive motions.

    A central issue in the litigation is whether expert testimony is required for preemption arguments.

    Plaintiffs insist it is necessary, while Defendants aim for an early dismissal based on legal grounds alone.

    Several key agreements have been reached, including measures for confidentiality, proof of Depo-Provera use and related injuries, and the requirements for Pfizer’s document production.

    Plaintiffs have secured 35 days of depositions for Pfizer representatives, with additional time allocated for other Defendants.

    Depositions can be conducted remotely and via video when necessary.

    Furthermore, cases involving generic distributors Greenstone and Prasco may be dismissed if Plaintiffs did not use their specific products.

    Special Master David Herndon and CPA Randall Sansom will play a role in case management and attorney compensation oversight.

    Both parties have also determined that a Science Day is not required at this time, and medical monitoring class actions remain on hold.

    With discovery now in progress, further updates are expected in the coming months.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly

    March 5th, 2025: New Concerns Over Severe Blood Clot Risks

    A recent case report raises concerns that Depo-Provera birth control shots could heighten the risk of severe blood clots, following a 21-year-old woman’s multiple pulmonary embolisms shortly after the injection.

    Physicians at Cape Fear Valley Medical Center shared the case in the Cureus journal, detailing how the patient developed phlegmasia cerulea dolens (PCD), a rare and dangerous form of deep vein thrombosis (DVT).

    She required intensive medical treatment, including thrombectomy and anticoagulation therapy.

    This comes after a recent JAMA study linked Depo-Provera to the highest risk of serious blood clots among hormonal contraceptives.

    Additionally, Depo-Provera lawsuits related to brain tumors are rapidly increasing, with nearly 70 cases consolidated into multidistrict litigation (MDL) in Florida.

    More lawsuits are anticipated as women diagnosed with intracranial meningiomas associate their condition with the long-term use of the contraceptive.

    The court is preparing for bellwether trials to gauge jury reactions to evidence.

    If settlements are not reached, individual trials may follow.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    March 3rd, 2025: Judge Rodgers Calls for Female Attorneys in Leadership in Depo-Provera MDL

    Judge Casey Rodgers, the U.S. District Judge overseeing the federal Depo-Provera Lawsuit, has urged female attorneys to apply for leadership roles within the multidistrict litigation (MDL).

    The MDL was formed after research linked Depo-Provera, a widely used birth control injection, to an increased risk of brain tumors, specifically meningiomas.

    With all plaintiffs in the case being women, Judge Rodgers stressed the importance of having appropriate female representation in the leadership team. While not all positions need to be filled by women, she emphasized that proper representation is essential.

    Applications for attorney positions are due by March 7, 2025.

    Those selected will be responsible for managing discovery, overseeing evidence, and advocating for the plaintiffs in the MDL.

    Although these cases will not be binding, they are expected to shape settlement discussions by offering insights into jury reactions to similar claims.

    This call for female leadership has drawn criticism from the “Article III Project,” a conservative judicial group, which filed a complaint accusing Judge Rodgers of prioritizing gender over merit.

    Despite the complaint, Depo-Provera injury attorneys have strongly defended the need for gender diversity, emphasizing its importance for fair representation of the female plaintiffs.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

  • February 2025 Updates:

    February 20th, 2025: Depo-Provera Lawsuit Update: First Status Conference Scheduled

    The first status conference in the Depo-Provera multidistrict litigation (MDL) is set for Friday, February 21.

    This conference serves as an initial court meeting where the judge, attorneys, and involved parties will outline case management procedures, establish deadlines, and coordinate discovery efforts.

    This hearing will play a critical role in shaping the structure and timeline of the lawsuits against Depo-Provera manufacturers, including Pfizer.

    Key issues such as pretrial motions, expert testimony deadlines, and the selection process for bellwether trials may be addressed.

    As the litigation moves forward, this conference will provide insights into how the cases will proceed. More updates will follow as developments unfold.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    February 10th, 2025: Depo Provera MDL Assigned to Northern District of Florida

    The Depo Provera MDL has been officially established and assigned to Judge Rodgers in the Northern District of Florida.

    This choice came unexpectedly, as plaintiffs favored California and defendants leaned toward New York, but the JPML panel ultimately selected the Northern District of Florida, citing Judge Rodgers’ extensive experience in mass tort cases.

    Judge Rodgers, recognized for overseeing the 3M earplug litigation, now takes on another major mass tort as that case nears its end. This new case could span the next five years.

    While plaintiffs didn’t get their preferred venue, they remain hopeful about Judge Rodgers’ ability to efficiently steer the litigation toward bellwether trials and resolution.

    This decision represents a significant turning point in the Depo Provera litigation.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    February 4th, 2025: JPML to Determine Venue for Depo-Provera MDL

    On January 30, 2025, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) held a hearing in Miami, Florida, to discuss the potential consolidation of Depo-Provera cases into a multidistrict litigation (MDL).

    Although the panel agreed to establish an MDL, a decision regarding the location of the centralized proceedings was not made.

    Plaintiffs’ attorneys argued that California would be the ideal venue, given that most Depo-Provera lawsuits are already filed there.

    They also noted that California law permits lawsuits against brand-name drug manufacturers even if the plaintiff used a generic version.

    Additionally, many affected women have undergone brain surgery and may find California more accessible for trial. Pfizer, the drug’s manufacturer, is advocating for the MDL to be based in New York, where the company is headquartered.

    Pfizer maintains that key witnesses and evidence are in New York, and the lawsuits are distributed across various states.

    A ruling on the venue is expected in the near future. Attorneys for generic drug manufacturers suggested that the concentration of early cases in California could have been a strategic move to influence the MDL’s location.

    Once the JPML determines the venue, all federal Depo-Provera lawsuits will be transferred to that district for pretrial proceedings.

    The creation of an MDL is expected to streamline the legal process, offering both sides a more efficient path forward.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

  • January 2025 Updates:

    January 29th, 2025: JPML Hearing on Depo-Provera Lawsuits Scheduled for January 30

    The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) is set to convene on January 30, 2025, to evaluate whether federal lawsuits related to Depo-Provera should be consolidated into a single multidistrict litigation (MDL).

    The lawsuits, brought against Pfizer and additional manufacturers of the contraceptive injection, allege that the drug raises the likelihood of developing intracranial meningiomas—potentially dangerous brain tumors.

    If approved, the MDL would centralize both existing and future cases before one judge, facilitating coordinated pretrial proceedings, discovery, and early bellwether trials.

    Pfizer and the manufacturers of generic versions of Depo-Provera recognize the need for consolidation, though they remain divided on where the cases should be centralized.

    While the MDL would streamline pretrial matters, each lawsuit will continue to proceed as an individual claim.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    January 29th, 2025: Class Action Lawsuit Seeks Medical Monitoring for Depo-Provera Users

    A new class action lawsuit was filed on January 17 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, seeking medical monitoring for women who received Depo-Provera injections for at least one year.

    The plaintiff, Patricia Bonilla, argues that long-term users of the birth control shot face a heightened risk of developing meningiomas and should have access to ongoing medical surveillance, such as MRIs and CT scans.

    The lawsuit requests the establishment of a nationwide class or state-based subclasses to address these concerns.

    Since its introduction in 1992, Depo-Provera has been prescribed to over 70 million women in the U.S. Although Bonilla has not been diagnosed with a tumor, she asserts that her 11-year use of the drug necessitates lifelong health monitoring.

    This medical monitoring class action is distinct from the numerous personal injury claims filed by women who have already developed meningiomas, many of whom have undergone surgery and experienced severe health effects.

    The central legal question in these cases is whether Pfizer and other drug makers failed to disclose critical safety risks linked to Depo-Provera, potentially leaving thousands of women vulnerable to serious health consequences without proper warnings.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    January 17th, 2025:  Depo-Provera Lawsuits Over Brain Tumor Risks Move Toward Potential MDL Consolidation

    The number of lawsuits alleging a connection between Depo-Provera and the development of meningioma brain tumors is rapidly growing and may soon be consolidated into multidistrict litigation (MDL).

    The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) has scheduled a key hearing for January 30, 2025, at the Wilkie D. Ferguson, Jr. U.S. Courthouse in Miami, Florida.

    This hearing will determine whether the cases should be centralized under an MDL, a decision that could significantly influence the course of this litigation.

    The choice of MDL venue is a crucial factor in this decision, with New York and California emerging as the primary contenders.

    The venue will directly impact the litigation due to the issue of Innovator’s liability, which governs plaintiffs’ rights.

    Innovator’s liability is a legal principle that holds original manufacturers accountable for injuries caused by their products, even if the injuries stem from generic versions.

    Plaintiffs are advocating for the MDL to be established in California, where innovator liability laws allow claims against Pfizer by individuals who used generic forms of Depo-Provera.

    Notably, 18 of the 22 original lawsuits included in the MDL motion were filed in California.

    On the other hand, Pfizer is pushing for the MDL to be located in New York, where innovator liability is not recognized.

    If the MDL is centralized in New York, individuals who have used generic drug versions may be excluded from pursuing legal action.

    MDL consolidation is an efficient way to manage complex pharmaceutical cases involving numerous plaintiffs with varying injuries.

    Unlike class actions, MDLs preserve the individual nature of each case while centralizing pre-trial proceedings under one federal judge.

    This structure is particularly suitable for Depo-Provera litigation, where injuries like meningiomas associated with high-dose progestin require personalized evaluations of damages and circumstances.

    Once the MDL is established, plaintiffs can file short-form complaints linked to a master complaint, simplifying the process for new claimants and their attorneys.

    The MDL will then proceed toward resolution, including individual settlements or a broader global settlement agreement.

    A global settlement could involve creating a compensation fund to address claims collectively, using a settlement matrix to determine payouts.

    This approach ensures fairness and efficiency by considering each plaintiff’s unique circumstances and injuries, offering victims a streamlined path to justice.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    January 2nd, 2025

    Legal actions involving Depo-Provera are gaining traction not only in the United States but also in Australia, where women have reported developing brain tumors after prolonged use of the contraceptive injection.

    In Australia, a class action lawsuit is being filed against Pfizer, the manufacturer of Depo-Provera, with more women coming forward to report side effects and claim they were not adequately warned about the risks.

    A study published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) found that women who used Depo-Provera for more than one year had a significantly higher risk—five to six times—of developing meningiomas compared to non-users.

    This alarming finding has led to lawsuits in several countries, including Australia, where the drug has been a widely used contraceptive for decades.

    Law firms are currently seeking participants for a class action lawsuit, arguing that Pfizer failed to properly inform users of the potential for serious risks, including brain tumors.

    The Australian lawsuit encompasses women who received Depo-Provera prescriptions from 1992 to the present, a period during which over 3.5 million prescriptions were dispensed in the country.

    Many of these women allege they were prescribed the injection for more than a decade, far exceeding medical guidelines that recommend a two-year maximum.

    Legal professionals in both Australia and the United States are investigating whether Pfizer neglected to disclose these risks, leaving millions of women unaware of the potential consequences.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

  • December 2024 Updates:

    December 30th, 2024: Plaintiffs Seek MDL Consolidation for Depo-Provera Lawsuits, Pfizer Agrees but Disputes Venue

    The Depo-Provera Lawsuit is ongoing. 

    As Depo-Provera lawsuits against Pfizer continue to gain momentum in federal court, plaintiffs have filed a motion to consolidate all cases related to the injectable contraceptive before a single judge.

    While Pfizer has agreed to the consolidation proposal, it disagrees with the plaintiffs’ suggested venue.

    Currently, more than 22 Depo-Provera lawsuits are pending in various U.S. District Courts across the country, including six in the Northern District of California, the venue proposed by the plaintiffs for centralizing discovery and pretrial proceedings.

    The plaintiffs have petitioned to combine the lawsuits into multidistrict litigation (MDL) to streamline the legal process and avoid duplicating efforts in multiple courts.

    Pfizer has supported the MDL consolidation but recommends transferring the cases to the Southern District of New York, citing its proximity to Pfizer’s corporate headquarters as beneficial for accessing key witnesses and evidence.

    The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) is scheduled to review the venue and consolidation request at a hearing on January 30, 2025.

    If approved, all current and future Depo-Provera claims will be overseen by a single judge for pretrial motions.

    Individual cases may still go to trial if settlements are not reached.

    Depo-Provera has been linked to a significantly increased risk of developing meningiomas, a type of brain tumor.

    Research suggests that women who used the drug face a five-fold greater risk compared to those who did not.

    Most lawsuits allege that Pfizer failed to adequately warn consumers about these risks, making the MDL proposal a critical step in ensuring consistency in how these claims are handled.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    December 27th, 2024: University of Plymouth Leads Research on Meningiomas in NF2-Related Schwannomatosis

    Researchers at the University of Plymouth are spearheading a project to investigate meningiomas in NF2-related schwannomatosis (NF2-SWN), a condition caused by the loss of the NF2 gene.

    Although meningiomas are generally non-cancerous, they can significantly impact patients’ quality of life.

    Supported by the Children’s Tumor Foundation, the project focuses on developing a humanized model to study interactions between human immune cells and meningioma tumors.

    This research is essential for advancing new therapies, particularly as meningiomas have shown resistance to chemotherapy.

    While surgery is the primary treatment for most meningiomas, recurring or aggressive cases often require additional drug therapies, highlighting the need for improved treatment options.

    Recent findings have also suggested a possible connection between Depo Provera, a hormonal contraceptive, and an increased risk of meningiomas.

    Over 75 million women globally have reported using this drug.

    Dr. Liyam Laraba leads the research at the University’s Brain Tumor Research Center of Excellence.

    Her team is working to create the humanized model by implanting human immune cells into mice, providing a more realistic approach to evaluating treatments prior to clinical trials.

    This initiative is part of the Children’s Tumor Foundation’s NF Preclinical Hub Funding Program, aimed at expediting drug discovery and preclinical research for neurofibromatosis disorders.

    Building on successful frameworks such as the NF Preclinical and Therapeutics Consortium, the program strives to accelerate the development of therapies for patients.

    The project holds promise for delivering more effective treatments for meningiomas and improving outcomes for individuals with NF2-SWN.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    December 20th, 2024: New Depo-Provera Lawsuit Filed in Louisiana, Alleging Long-Term Use Led to Brain Tumor

    The Depo-Provera Lawsuit is ongoing.

    A new lawsuit has been filed in the Eastern District of Louisiana against several pharmaceutical companies regarding the birth control drug Depo-Provera.

    The plaintiff alleges that long-term use of Depo-Provera led to serious health conditions, including intracranial meningioma and paradoxical vocal cord dysfunction.

    She began quarterly injections of Depo-Provera in 1992, shortly after the FDA approved the drug, and continued for three to four years.

    In February 2020, she was diagnosed with intracranial meningioma, a condition linked to long-term use of Depo-Provera, as supported by numerous studies.

    The lawsuit claims the defendants failed to warn her or her healthcare providers about the potential risks associated with extended use of the drug.

    The plaintiff seeks compensatory damages for medical expenses, lost income, and other harm, as well as punitive damages for alleged negligence.

    Currently, over 22 federal Depo-Provera lawsuits are pending across the United States, with the majority filed in California.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    December 13th, 2024: Depo-Provera Users Pursue Legal Action Against Pfizer Over Brain Tumor Risks

    Women who have used Depo-Provera, an injectable contraceptive produced by Pfizer, are pursuing legal action after experiencing severe side effects, including brain tumors.

    Meningioma, a type of brain tumor that forms in the membranes surrounding the brain, can cause symptoms such as headaches, vision disturbances, and seizures.

    The lawsuits allege that Pfizer failed to provide adequate warnings about the potential dangers of long-term Depo-Provera use.

    Approved by the FDA in 1992 as a contraceptive, Depo-Provera contains medroxyprogesterone acetate, an ingredient used in other treatments since 1959.

    The drug was promoted as a convenient birth control option, requiring only four injections annually, catering to individuals seeking reliable and low-maintenance contraception.

    However, plaintiffs argue that this convenience came at the expense of unreported health risks.

    A French study published in March 2024 found that using Depo-Provera for one year or more increased the risk of developing meningioma by 5.55 times.

    The research analyzed data from over 18,000 women who underwent surgery for meningiomas between 2009 and 2018, supporting claims that prolonged Depo-Provera use significantly raises the risk of these tumors.

    One plaintiff, referred to as T.C. for privacy reasons, stated she used Depo-Provera for three years and was later diagnosed with a meningioma.

    During her use, she experienced prolonged bleeding, intense headaches, and severe fatigue.

    After her diagnosis, T.C. underwent regular MRIs and treatments to monitor the tumor’s growth, which she describes as an ongoing source of anxiety.

    Plaintiffs and their lawyers are advocating for increased awareness of the risks associated with Depo-Provera, urging women to consult medical professionals if they notice adverse symptoms and to consider legal action if a brain tumor develops.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    December 11th, 2024: California Woman Files Suit Over Depo-Provera-Related Brain Tumor

    Another California resident has initiated legal proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, claiming that her use of Depo-Provera for approximately eight (8) years led to the development of an intracranial meningioma.

    The lawsuit targets Pfizer, Inc., Pharmacia & Upjohn Co. LLC, and Pharmacia LLC — alleging strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty.

    The plaintiff contends that the defendants failed to provide adequate warnings about the risks associated with long-term use of Depo-Provera, particularly the potential for meningioma development.

    Having used the contraceptive from 1994 to 2002, she was diagnosed with a meningioma in 2015 after experiencing severe neurological symptoms.

    This case adds to the growing number of long-term usage claims and further solidifies California’s position as a focal point for Depo-Provera litigation, strengthening the argument for MDL consolidation in the state.

    December 7th, 2024: Philadelphia Resident Files Depo-Provera Lawsuit in State Court

    A new lawsuit has been filed in the Court of Common Pleas for Philadelphia County by a local resident, alleging that extended use of Depo-Provera resulted in the development of a debilitating meningioma.

    The plaintiff, who began using the injectable contraceptive as a teenager, claims that the manufacturers (including Pfizer and affiliated companies) failed to adequately warn users about the risks associated with medroxyprogesterone acetate — the active ingredient in Depo-Provera.

    The plaintiff, who has undergone multiple brain surgeries and continues to suffer from physical and cognitive impairments, is seeking both compensatory and punitive damages.

    The lawsuit also names healthcare providers affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania Health System as defendants — alleging their failure to disclose safer contraceptive alternatives.

    This case underscores the anticipated strong Depo-Provera docket in Philadelphia.

    December 6th, 2024: Inoperable Brain Tumors Emerge as Significant Concern in Depo-Provera Cases

    Legal representatives are observing a higher-than-expected incidence of inoperable meningiomas in Depo-Provera cases.

    These tumors, which cannot be safely removed due to their location or involvement with critical brain structures, pose significant challenges for patients and medical professionals alike.

    The impact of these inoperable tumors is profound, often resulting in persistent symptoms and ongoing health risks.

    Patients frequently report severe headaches, vision loss, memory problems, and other neurological impairments.

    Treatment options for these cases are limited, often restricted to radiation therapy or long-term monitoring, leaving patients to cope with both the physical and emotional toll of their condition.

    December 5th, 2024: Depo Provera Cases Expected to Proceed as MDL, Not Class Action

    Legal experts anticipate that lawsuits against Depo Provera manufacturers will likely be consolidated into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) rather than a traditional class action.

    This approach, common in complex pharmaceutical cases, allows for efficient handling of numerous claims while preserving individual case integrity.

    In an MDL, each plaintiff retains their own lawsuit, unlike a class action where one representative speaks for all.

    Cases are transferred to a single federal court, where a judge oversees pre-trial proceedings, addressing common issues such as the alleged link between Depo Provera’s high-dose progestin and meningiomas, and the adequacy of warning labels.

    The MDL structure offers benefits including individualized case consideration, streamlined pre-trial processes, and the option for either individual settlements or a global settlement agreement.

    This approach is particularly suited to the Depo Provera situation, where injuries and circumstances vary significantly among plaintiffs.

    December 4th, 2024: Proposed Depo-Provera Brain Tumor MDL Would Be Based in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California

    Attorneys representing plaintiffs in Depo-Provera lawsuits have filed a motion to centralize all related cases into a federal multidistrict litigation (MDL).

    The plaintiffs claim that Depo-Provera, a hormonal contraceptive containing medroxyprogesterone acetate, significantly increases the risk of developing brain tumors, with recent studies indicating a fivefold increase in risk for women using the product.

    These lawsuits accuse the drug’s manufacturers of failing to adequately warn both users and the medical community about these potential dangers.

    Many affected women have undergone invasive surgeries to treat their brain tumors and now face long-term consequences, including vision loss, seizure disorders, and lasting neurological damage.

    On November 26, a motion was submitted to the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML), seeking to consolidate at least 22 lawsuits currently pending in eight district courts nationwide.

    The proposed MDL would be based in the Northern District of California, where six of the cases are already filed.

    Plaintiffs argue that centralization is necessary because the lawsuits share nearly identical allegations and legal questions, which would help streamline pretrial proceedings, prevent inconsistent rulings, and reduce legal expenses.

    They also note that the litigation is expected to grow significantly, with additional claims anticipated in the coming months.

    If the JPML grants the motion, all current and future Depo-Provera lawsuits will be assigned to a single judge for coordinated pretrial proceedings, including discovery and motions.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit.

    Our team is currently accepting new clients.

    Contact TruLaw’s Depo-Provera Lawyers for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

    December 2nd, 2024: 6 Manufacturers Named as Defendants in Proposed Depo-Provera Brain Tumor MDL

    Legal representatives for twenty-two (22) women have initiated federal proceedings against six (6) manufacturers of Depo-Provera and its generic counterparts.

    The motion for multidistrict litigation (MDL) consolidation identifies Pfizer, Pharmacia & Upjohn Co. LLC, Greenstone LLC, Viatris Inc., Pharmacia LLC, and Prasco LLC as defendants.

    Should the consolidation occur, these entities could face liability for producing and marketing a contraceptive associated with brain tumor development in numerous women.

  • November 2024 Updates:

    November 27th, 2024: Judicial Panel to Consider Consolidation of Depo-Provera Lawsuits into Multidistrict Litigation (MDL)

    Plaintiffs in the Depo-Provera lawsuits have filed a motion with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to consolidate the cases into a single multidistrict litigation (MDL).

    With 22 cases currently pending, they have suggested the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California as the venue, citing its track record with major MDLs, including Roundup.

    The next hearing on the motion is set for December 5th, 2024 — meaning the JPML will not review this litigation until 2025.

    If granted, it could become the first significant mass tort of the new year.

    Plaintiffs argue that centralized pretrial proceedings through an MDL are critical to addressing the complexities of Depo-Provera lawsuits, which allege serious health issues (including meningiomas) that are linked to prolonged use of the contraceptive.

    However, defendants are expected to oppose the motion and may propose transferring the cases to a District Court in New York.

    Karen Caldwell, the panel chair, will preside over the hearing scheduled for early 2025, with multiple filings expected in the interim.

    November 26th, 2024: Legal Grounds in the Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuit

    The Depo-Provera litigation centers on allegations that Pfizer neglected to adequately disclose critical side effects on product labels and possessed knowledge of the contraceptive’s link to brain tumors.

    Individuals diagnosed with brain tumors or meningiomas post-Depo-Provera use may be eligible for legal recourse.

    TruLaw and other legal experts investigating the Depo Provera Lawsuit have evaluated over 7,000 related claims for this case.

    TruLaw provides complimentary case assessments for those experiencing severe adverse effects.

    You can use the chat on this page for an instant case evaluation to see if you may qualify for the Depo-Provera brain tumor lawsuit.

    November 22nd, 2024: New Depo-Provera Lawsuits Name Healthcare Entities and Pharmacies

    A recent lawsuit filed on November 15th, 2024, in the Superior Court of California in Alameda County, has named not only the manufacturers of Depo-Provera but also healthcare entities and pharmacies as defendants.

    The plaintiff, Madison Le, alleges that these entities (including Kaiser Permanente International, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc., and the Permanente Medical Group Inc.) were aware of the dangers associated with Depo-Provera through their own research but continued to administer and profit from the drug.

    This lawsuit underscores the expanding scope of liability in Depo-Provera cases — highlighting the role of healthcare providers and pharmacies in the administration of the drug.

    November 21st, 2024: Inoperable Brain Tumors Linked to Depo-Provera Use

    Recent findings have highlighted that some brain tumors associated with Depo-Provera use are inoperable due to their location or infiltration into critical brain structures.

    This means that affected women may require alternative treatments such as radiation therapy, hormone therapy, or participation in clinical trials — which can prolong their suffering and significantly impact their quality of life.

    The inoperability of these tumors underscores the severe consequences of Depo-Provera use and the need for comprehensive preoperative imaging to assess treatment options.

    November 20th, 2024: Las Vegas Woman Diagnosed with Multiple Brain Tumors After Long-Term Depo-Provera Use

    A woman in Nevada has filed a lawsuit against Pfizer, alleging that her 20-year use of Depo-Provera led to the development of three intracranial meningiomas.

    Tina Stephens-Smith experienced symptoms such as headaches, blurred vision, and speech problems before discovering the densely calcified tumors.

    Her case highlights the long-term risks associated with Depo-Provera and the failure of Pfizer to adequately warn U.S. women about these dangers.

    November 19th, 2024: Importance of Preoperative Imaging for Meningioma Patients

    A review article in the Journal of Neuroimaging emphasizes the critical role of preoperative imaging in managing intracranial meningiomas linked to Depo-Provera use.

    The article underscores the need for a strong foundation in the latest meningioma imaging techniques to optimize preoperative planning and improve patient outcomes.

    This highlights the importance of targeted imaging for women who have used Depo-Provera and developed brain tumors that can be treated surgically.

    November 15th, 2024: Study Finds 53% Increased Risk of Meningiomas After Depo-Provera Use

    Lawsuits claim that Depo-Provera (a contraceptive medication manufactured by the defendants) caused significant harm, with scientific research linking the active ingredient in Depo-Provera, medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), to meningiomas.

    A recent database analysis found that the injectable form of MPA raised the risk of developing meningiomas by 53%, with the risk increasing the longer the drug was used.

    Additionally, data from 2004 to 2015 show a notable rise in meningioma cases, particularly among females, African Americans, and younger individuals.

    Plaintiffs argue that the defendants were aware of this danger for decades but failed to warn U.S. patients and healthcare providers.

    In contrast to the U.S., warnings about meningiomas have been added to the labels for Depo-Provera in Europe and Canada.

    Depo-Provera’s known risks include:

    • Bone Mineral Density Loss: Long-term use (over two years) may lead to permanent bone loss, especially in adolescents and high-risk individuals.
    • Thrombosis: Discontinuation of the drug is recommended if thrombosis occurs, with further assessment required for any vision or neurological issues.
    • Cancer Risks: Some users may experience an increased risk of breast and cervical cancers, particularly those with a family history of breast cancer.
    • Ectopic Pregnancy: Severe abdominal pain or suspected pregnancy should prompt evaluation for an ectopic pregnancy.
    • Adverse Reactions: Includes anaphylaxis, weight gain, depression, and irregular bleeding.

    November 14th, 2024: Progesterone Study Strengthens Causation Claims in Depo-Provera Lawsuits

    A study by David Bailey from January 2024 provides critical evidence for Depo-Provera lawsuits.

    The study shows that stopping progesterone drugs like Depo-Provera can lead to the regression of meningioma size.

    This finding supports both general and specific causation claims, bolstering the argument that Depo-Provera can cause an increased risk of meningioma and that it caused the meningioma in specific plaintiffs.

    November 13th, 2024: Concerns Over Meningioma Risk Linked to Depo-Provera Continue to Grow

    Concerns about the potential risk of developing brain tumors (particularly meningiomas) after using Depo-Provera continue to escalate.

    Meningiomas are slow-growing tumors that can cause severe health issues due to increased pressure on brain tissue, nerves, and blood vessels.

    As more evidence emerges about the link between Depo-Provera and brain tumors, legal actions against Pfizer for failing to appropriately update the contraceptive’s warning label are intensifying.

    November 12th, 2024: Pfizer Includes Meningioma Warning for Canadian Patients But Not for U.S. Women

    Pfizer has included a warning about the association between Depo-Provera and meningiomas in its product monograph for Canadian patients since at least 2016.

    However, no such warning is included in the prescribing information for U.S. women.

    This discrepancy has led to numerous lawsuits against Pfizer, alleging that the company failed to adequately warn U.S. women about the dangers of Depo-Provera.

    November 9th, 2024: New Depo-Provera Lawsuit Filed in California Alleging Link to Meningioma

    Mayra Valencia has filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of California, alleging that her 23-year use of Depo-Provera led to the development of a brain tumor.

    The complaint states that Pfizer knew or should have known about the risk of meningioma associated with Depo-Provera and failed to warn U.S. women.

    The lawsuit also highlights studies dating back to 1983 that show a correlation between progesterone use and meningioma.

    November 7th, 2024: Depo-Provera Settlement Amounts Could Be High Due to Several Factors

    Depo-Provera settlement amounts are projected to be substantial due to several factors.

    First, studies have shown a significant increase in the risk of brain tumors — with a 5.5x increased risk being one of the highest observed in mass torts.

    Second, the type of injury (brain tumors) is particularly severe.

    Additionally, Pfizer is well-funded and can afford significant settlements.

    Given the relatively low number of potential lawsuits (estimated to be between 5,000 to 30,000), settlement values could be higher than in other mass torts — potentially exceeding $100,000 per case.

    November 2nd, 2024: Depo-Provera Lawsuits Focus on Meningiomas and Potential Breast Cancer Link

    Depo-Provera has been scrutinized for its potential health risks, including an increased risk of meningiomas and possibly breast cancer.

    A 1988 study highlighted criticisms about the drug’s safety, including animal studies suggesting an increased cancer risk.

    While current lawsuits primarily focus on meningiomas, there may also be a link to an increased risk of breast cancer for long-term users of Depo-Provera.

    November 1st, 2024: Another Woman Files Depo-Provera Lawsuit Against Pfizer

    A California woman, Anjanna Lawson, has filed a lawsuit against Pfizer and other defendants after being diagnosed with an intracranial meningioma.

    Lawson started receiving Depo-Provera injections at age 16 and continued until September 2024.

    Despite undergoing a right pterional craniotomy in July 2023 to remove the tumor, a residual tumor was discovered in early 2024, necessitating five sessions of stereotactic radiosurgery.

    The tumor remains uneradicated, causing Lawson to suffer from vision loss, facial spasms, and a burning sensation in her face.

    Her lawsuit seeks damages from Pfizer, Inc., Viatris, Inc., Greenstone, LLC, Prasco, LLC, Pharmacia & Upjohn LLC, and Pharmacia, LLC — alleging that these entities failed to adequately warn about the risks associated with Depo-Provera use.

    Key notes regarding Anjanna Lawson’s Depo-Provera lawsuit:

    • Plaintiff: Anjanna Lawson (a California resident).
    • Defendants: Pfizer, Inc., Viatris, Inc., Greenstone, LLC, Prasco, LLC, Pharmacia & Upjohn LLC, and Pharmacia, LLC.
    • Allegations: Failure to warn about the risks of developing intracranial meningiomas associated with Depo-Provera use.
    • Symptoms: Vision loss, facial spasms, and a burning sensation in the face due to an uneradicated tumor.
    • Treatment: Right pterional craniotomy and stereotactic radiosurgery.
    • Lawsuit Focus: Seeking damages for the harm caused by Depo-Provera use.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be entitled to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit. 

    Our lawyers are still accepting new clients. 

    Contact our Depo-Provera Lawyers today for a free consultation, or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

  • October 2024 Updates:

    October 30th, 2024: JPML Hearing Set for December 5th, 2024

    The Depo-Provera lawsuit is ongoing. 

    Depo-Provera Lawsuits continue to be actively filed in federal courts, with projections suggesting over 30 cases could be filed by the end of November.

    These filings are primarily concentrated in the Northern District of California and the Southern District of Texas.

    A significant Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) hearing (to consider the potential for case consolidation into an MDL) is set for December 5th, 2024. 

    However, the formation of an official multidistrict litigation (MDL) is not expected before year-end.

    An MDL typically forms when 25 or more related cases, addressing similar legal issues and involving the same defendants, are pending in various federal courts.

    This threshold is anticipated to be met with the Depo-Provera cases.

    While plaintiffs may prefer California as the coordination venue, defendants are expected to oppose this and suggest New York instead.

    October 29th, 2024: New Depo-Provera Lawsuit Filed in California with Potential for Multidistrict Consolidation

    The Depo-Provera lawsuit is ongoing. 

    A new case has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, accusing the makers of Depo-Provera of contributing to the development of a meningioma brain tumor in a woman who used the birth control shot for nearly 25 years.

    The plaintiff is bringing legal action against Pfizer, Viatris, Greenstone, Prasco, and Pharmacia & Upjohn — claiming the companies did not provide adequate warnings in the U.S. regarding the risk of brain tumors (a warning that has been included on Canadian labels since 2015).

    According to the lawsuit, the plaintiff began using Depo-Provera injections in 2000 and received a total of 91 doses over her treatment period.

    In 2020, she started experiencing severe symptoms (including headaches, blurred vision, vertigo, and ear itching) — leading to the diagnosis of a calcified meningioma brain tumor that continued to grow.

    Due to its calcified nature, surgical removal has been deemed too dangerous, leaving her with chronic pain and ongoing symptoms.

    The complaint further alleges that Pfizer and related companies failed to adequately research and disclose the potential risks of long-term Depo-Provera use, which could include the development of meningiomas.

    This case adds to the increasing number of Depo-Provera lawsuits being filed nationwide.

    October 25th, 2024: Second Depo-Provera Lawsuit Filed Against Pfizer by Indiana Woman

    An Indiana woman, Lesley Noble, has filed a lawsuit against Pfizer, alleging that her 20-year use of Depo-Provera caused her brain tumor and subsequent injuries.

    Noble underwent invasive surgery to remove her intracranial meningioma in 2017, but the tumor aggressively regrew after six months.

    She then underwent 36 rounds of radiation while still taking Depo-Provera, unaware of its potential causation.

    Noble and her husband, Justin Noble, are demanding a jury trial for her injuries.

    October 22nd, 2024: Pfizer and Co-Defendants Face 9 Accusations In First Depo-Provera Lawsuit

    Pfizer and its co-defendants, including Viatris, Inc., Greenstone LLC, Prasco Labs, and Pharmacia & Upjohn, face nine allegations of wrongdoing in a federal Depo-Provera lawsuit filed by Kristina Schmidt in California.

    The charges include Failure to Warn, Design Defect, Negligence, Negligent Failure to Warn, Negligent Design Defect, Negligent Misrepresentation, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Breach of Express Warranty, and Breach of Implied Warranty.

    These allegations accuse Pfizer and the other defendants of knowingly designing, marketing, and manufacturing a drug that could cause intracranial meningiomas without proper warning.

    October 17th, 2024: Evidence Suggests Exposure to Hormones in Depo-Provera May Cause Spinal Tumors

    Recent studies have linked Depo-Provera use to brain tumors, specifically intracranial meningiomas.

    New research is focusing on meningiomas that form on the spinal cord.

    An article in Neuro-Oncology Advances notes that while less than 13% of meningiomas are on the spinal cord, they make up about a quarter of spinal cord tumors.

    The article suggests that external hormone sources, such as Depo-Provera injections, may be linked to a higher risk of developing meningiomas in the brain or spinal cord.

    October 11th, 2024: Pfizer’s Legal Battle Over Depo-Provera and Generic Drug Liability

    A central issue in the Depo-Provera lawsuit is whether Pfizer is legally responsible for meningiomas caused by generic versions of Depo-Provera.

    The Supreme Court’s ruling in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. Bartlett states that generic drug manufacturers are not liable if their drug has the same active ingredient as an approved drug.

    However, in the Depo-Provera case, the generic manufacturers are mostly wholly owned subsidiaries of Pfizer, and the drugs were manufactured at the same sites as Depo-Provera.

    This issue is expected to be aggressively litigated as part of the lawsuit.

    October 10th, 2024: Statute of Limitations Considerations in Depo-Provera Lawsuits

    The Depo-Provera lawsuits have highlighted important legal issues regarding the statute of limitations in such cases.

    There are two (2) key factors that may allow individuals to file lawsuits for Depo-Provera-related injuries without being hindered by the statute of limitations:

    1. The “Discovery Rule”
    2. The Doctrine of Fraudulent Concealment

    The first is the “Discovery Rule” — which is recognized in many states and allows the statute of limitations to be extended.

    This rule delays the filing deadline until the injured party becomes aware of both the injury and its cause.

    In the case of Depo-Provera, recent studies have uncovered a possible link between the drug and brain tumors, a connection that was not widely known before.

    Because this evidence has only recently emerged, plaintiffs were not expected to know about the potential link between their conditions and Depo-Provera until now.

    The second factor is the Doctrine of Fraudulent Concealment, which could also apply.

    This legal doctrine allows the statute of limitations to be paused if the defendant deliberately hides key safety information.

    Plaintiffs claim that Depo-Provera’s manufacturers concealed the drug’s risks by altering safety warnings and product labeling — making it difficult for consumers to identify the potential connection between Depo-Provera and brain tumors like meningiomas.

    This alleged concealment means plaintiffs may argue they were unable to learn of the risks in time — effectively extending their window to file a lawsuit.

    Together, the discovery rule and fraudulent concealment may provide a strong foundation for plaintiffs to challenge statute of limitations issues in the Depo-Provera lawsuits.

    October 4th, 2024: Woman Files Lawsuit Against Pfizer Alleging Depo-Provera Caused Her Brain Tumor

    Kristina Schmidt has filed a lawsuit against Pfizer in the Northern District of California, alleging that Depo-Provera caused her intracranial meningioma.

    Her attorneys claim that Pfizer knew or should have known for decades that Depo-Provera could cause or substantially contribute to the development of meningiomas.

    Since her diagnosis, Schmidt has endured significant, invasive treatments and experienced serious injuries.

    This case is part of a growing number of lawsuits against Pfizer for their injectable contraceptive.

    October 3rd, 2024: Depo-Provera Tied to Highest Cancer Rate Increase Among Commercial Drugs

    Lawyers are highly interested in pursuing Depo-Provera lawsuits because early studies indicate that the drug makes the diagnosed injury over five times more likely to occur, one of the highest increases in cancer rates among commercially available drugs.

    This contrasts with the Roundup lawsuit, where lawyers argued that Roundup causes a 69% increase in the likelihood of cancer — leading to several verdicts over $1 billion.

    The proof in the Depo-Provera case is believed to be even stronger.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be entitled to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit. 

    Our lawyers are still accepting new clients. 

    Contact our Depo-Provera Lawyers today for a free consultation, or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

  • September 2024 Updates:

    September 30th, 2024: Depo-Provera Lawsuit Expands as More Plaintiffs Learn of Potential Risks

    The Depo-Provera lawsuit is gaining momentum as more potential plaintiffs become aware of the allegations against Pfizer.

    A French study has established a link between Depo-Provera injections and meningiomas (tumors that arise from the protective membranes covering the brain and spinal cord).

    Symptoms of meningioma may include (but are not limited to):

    • Headaches
    • Vision changes
    • Seizures
    • Memory loss
    • Dizziness

    Further research is needed to understand why Depo-Provera may increase the risk of tumor growth.

    With 74 million women worldwide having used the drug, the potential scale of this litigation is significant.

    September 25th, 2024: Depo-Provera’s Tumultuous History and Rising Legal Challenges

    Depo-Provera’s journey has been marked by regulatory ups and downs since its development in 1959.

    Initially approved by the FDA in 1974, the drug’s approval was revoked in 1978 due to cancer-related concerns.

    It regained FDA approval in 1992 as a contraceptive.

    Recent research (including a study published in the British Medical Journal) has uncovered a potential link between Depo-Provera use and the development of meningiomas and other brain tumors.

    Given its widespread use over five decades, experts anticipate a significant increase in lawsuits in the coming years.

    September 17th, 2024: Pfizer Confronts New Wave of Legal Action Over Depo-Provera

    Pfizer is facing renewed legal scrutiny regarding Depo-Provera.

    A recent study revealed that women who received as few as two Depo-Provera injections have a more than fivefold increased risk of developing meningiomas.

    This isn’t the first time the drug has been at the center of legal disputes.

    Previous lawsuits (such as the 2008 case Cassandra Colville v. Pharmacia & Upjohn) focused on allegations of bone density loss associated with the drug’s use.

    Since then, Pfizer has acquired the rights to manufacture and distribute Depo-Provera.

    September 13th, 2024: Study Reveals High-Value Potential of Meningioma Lawsuits Linked to Depo-Provera

    A 2020 analysis of 47 meningioma lawsuits has caught the attention of legal professionals investigating cases involving women who used Depo-Provera.

    The study found that in 68.1% of cases, failure to diagnose was the primary basis for legal action.

    Notably, the average verdict in these lawsuits amounted to $3,409,650.22 — with settlements averaging $867,555.56.

    These figures suggest that meningioma cases could result in substantial compensation.

    If a causal link between Depo-Provera and increased meningioma risk is established, legal experts project settlement values could reach several hundred thousand dollars — considering Pfizer’s financial capacity.

    September 10th, 2024: Potential Federal Consolidation of Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Claims

    Approximately one-quarter of sexually active women have used Depo-Provera at some point in their lives.

    As a result of its widespread use, numerous women diagnosed with brain tumors are now pursuing legal action against the drug’s manufacturers.

    Legal experts anticipate that these cases will likely be consolidated in federal court — paving the way for coordinated legal proceedings against the pharmaceutical companies involved.

    September 5th, 2024: Depo-Provera’s Complex Regulatory Past and Emerging Health Concerns

    Depo-Provera faced multiple FDA rejections throughout the 1970s and 1980s before finally gaining approval in 1992.

    Since its approval, the drug has been associated with reduced bone density and significant side effects upon discontinuation.

    Originally developed by Upjohn, Depo-Provera is now manufactured by Pfizer.

    Recent studies have further complicated the drug’s history by suggesting a potential link to brain tumors — adding to the existing health concerns surrounding its use.

    If you or a loved one developed a brain tumor after using Depo-Provera, you may be entitled to seek compensation through a Depo-Provera Lawsuit. 

    Our lawyers are still accepting new clients. 

    Contact our Depo-Provera Lawyers today for a free consultation, or use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a claim instantly.

Overview of Depo Provera Birth Control Shot

The injectable contraceptive Depo Provera works by delivering a high dose of synthetic progesterone through quarterly intramuscular injections, effectively preventing pregnancy for three months by suppressing the body’s natural hormone production.

The drug gained popularity among women seeking long-term contraception without the daily responsibility of oral birth control pills, particularly among teenagers and young adults who appreciated its convenience and high efficacy rate.

Available in two formulations – the standard 150mg intramuscular injection (Depo-Provera) and a lower-dose 104mg subcutaneous version (Depo-SubQ Provera 104) – the birth control injection has been prescribed to approximately74 million women globally.

Overview of Depo Provera Birth Control Shot

The Depo Provera shot is commonly prescribed for reasons such as:

  • Long-Term Contraception: Women preferring birth control without daily medication requirements.
  • Endometriosis Management: Patients needing hormone progestin therapy to relieve endometriosis symptoms.
  • Estrogen Contraindications: Individuals who cannot safely use estrogen-containing contraceptives.
  • Youth Convenience: Teenagers and young adults choosing discrete, long-acting birth control methods.

Pfizer has maintained control over Depo-Provera’s production, labeling, and safety information since acquiring Pharmacia & Upjohn in 2002, making the company responsible for all warnings and contraindications on the drug’s labeling.

Despite the availability of a lower-dose subcutaneous formulation that could potentially reduce meningioma risk, Pfizer has continued to primarily market the higher-dose intramuscular version in the United States.

The company’s global revenue from Depo-Provera sales has generated billions of dollars over the past three decades, making it one of the most profitable contraceptive products in pharmaceutical history.

Primary Health Concerns Leading to Legal Action

The most serious adverse effect driving current litigation is the development of intracranial meningiomas – typically benign but potentially life-threatening brain tumors that grow in the protective membranes surrounding the brain and spinal cord.

If you’ve used Depo-Provera and experienced unexplained headaches, vision changes, or neurological symptoms, contact TruLaw today for a free consultation to discuss your potential case.

Research published in the British Medical Journal recently discovered that women taking Depo Provera for more than one year faced a staggering 5.6-fold increased risk of developing these tumors compared to non-users.

While meningiomas are often classified as benign, their location near vital brain structures can cause devastating symptoms including severe headaches, vision loss, hearing impairment, seizures, and cognitive changes that dramatically impact quality of life.

Overview of Depo Provera Birth Control Shot; Primary Health Concerns Leading to Legal Action

The most serious health concerns Depo Provera linked to include:

  • Intracranial Meningiomas: Tumors necessitating surgical removal and lifelong monitoring.
  • Bone Density Loss: Substantial reduction leading to fractures and early osteoporosis.
  • Fertility Issues: Extended delays in fertility recovery, sometimes leading to permanent infertility.
  • Mood Disorders: Severe depression, anxiety disorders, and emotional disturbances.
  • Menstrual Irregularities: Persistent bleeding issues or amenorrhea lasting long after cessation.
  • Weight Gain: Substantial body weight increases that can persist after discontinuation.

Unlike common birth control side effects that resolve after stopping medication, many Depo-Provera complications can persist indefinitely or worsen over time.

Meningiomas may continue growing even after discontinuing the injection, requiring multiple surgeries, radiation therapy, and lifelong neurological monitoring.

The tumors’ proximity to vital brain regions means that even “successful” surgical removal can result in permanent disabilities including memory loss, personality changes, and motor function impairment.

For many women, the discovery of a brain tumor linked to their contraceptive choice has fundamentally altered their life trajectory, requiring extensive medical care and dramatically limiting their personal and professional opportunities.

Long term Depo Provera use among Depo Provera patients has been associated with serious health risks beyond brain tumors, including bone mineral density loss that may never fully recover and fertility delays that can extend years beyond typical contraceptive recovery periods.

Timeline of Safety Warnings and Label Changes

The scientific connection between synthetic progesterone and meningioma development was first established in 1983, nearly a decade before Depo-Provera received FDA approval for contraceptive use. Plaintiffs allege Pfizer has failed to incorporate adequate warnings about brain tumor risks on U.S. product labels.

Following the publication of compelling evidence in March 2024, regulatory agencies in the European Union, United Kingdom, and Canada mandated that Pfizer add meningioma warnings to Depo-Provera labeling in their jurisdictions.

Despite acknowledging awareness of the meningioma risk in public statements, Pfizer has not updated warning labels for American consumers, leaving millions of U.S. women uninformed about potentially life-threatening complications.

Here is a timeline of Depo Provera safety warnings history:

  • January 1983: Research establishes link between progesterone exposure and meningioma growth
  • October 1992: FDA approves Depo-Provera for contraceptive use without meningioma warnings
  • November 2004: Black box warning added for bone density loss after extensive litigation
  • March 27, 2024: BMJ publishes landmark study showing 5.6x increased meningioma risk
  • April 2024: Pfizer acknowledges risk but claims to be “working with regulatory agencies”
  • September 2024: European Medicines Agency mandates meningioma warnings on Depo-Provera labels

The U.S. labels still remain unchanged despite these international warnings.

The delayed implementation of safety warnings in the United States may strengthen legal claims for women who weren’t adequately informed about meningioma risks during their treatment, particularly given that physicians prescribing Depo Provera lacked adequate information about these brain tumor risks.

If you used Depo-Provera before learning about brain tumor risks and have since been diagnosed with a meningioma, you may be entitled to substantial compensation from TruLaw’s experienced legal team.

International regulatory actions demonstrate that the scientific evidence was sufficient to warrant warnings, yet Pfizer chose not to update U.S. labels, potentially prioritizing profits over patient safety.

This pattern of selective disclosure across different markets may constitute evidence of corporate negligence and deliberate concealment of known risks from American consumers.

Types of Injuries and Conditions Associated with Depo Provera Usage

Beyond the newly discovered meningioma risks driving current litigation, Depo-Provera has been associated with a range of serious health complications that can persist long after discontinuing the injection.

The synthetic hormone in Depo-Provera disrupts normal physiological processes in ways that can cause both immediate side effects and long-term health consequences, with some complications becoming apparent only years after beginning treatment.

Bone Density Loss and Osteoporosis Risk

Depo-Provera’s suppression of estrogen production leads to bone mineral density loss, a well-documented side effect that prompted the FDA to add a black box warning to the medication in November 2004.

The hormone disruption causes accelerated bone loss similar to menopause, with women losing approximately 5-6% of their bone density during the first two years of use, and additional losses continuing with prolonged Depo Provera treatment.

Overview of Depo Provera Birth Control Shot; Primary Health Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Types of Injuries and Conditions Associated with Depo Provera UsageHealth Concerns Leading to Legal Action

Previous bone-related complications associated with Depo-Provera include:

  • Rapid Bone Loss: Substantial spine and hip bone density reduction early in treatment.
  • Accelerated Decline: Bone loss exceeding typical age-related deterioration.
  • Incomplete Recovery: Ongoing density deficits years after discontinuation.
  • Fracture Risks: Higher incidence of fractures, especially in hips, spine, and wrists.
  • Premature Osteoporosis: Early onset in women under age 50.
  • Youth Vulnerability: Disrupted peak bone mass development in adolescents and young adults.

The FDA’s black box warning specifically cautions that bone loss may not be completely reversible after stopping Depo-Provera, making this a permanent injury for many women.

The manufacturer’s delayed warnings about bone loss, combined with the irreversible nature of the injury, provide strong grounds for legal action against Pfizer.

Brain Tumors and Meningiomas

Intracranial meningiomas represent the most serious and legally important injury associated with prolonged Depo Provera use, with March 2024 research demonstrating a devastating 5.6-fold increased risk for women using the injection for more than one year.

These brain tumors develop in the protective membranes surrounding the brain and spinal cord, where they can grow to substantial sizes before causing noticeable symptoms, often requiring emergency surgery when discovered.

While classified as typically benign, meningiomas can cause life-threatening complications due to their location, and even successful surgical removal often results in permanent neurological damage affecting memory, vision, hearing, and cognitive function.

The meningioma-related complications driving current litigation include, but are not limited to:

  • Large Tumors: Substantial growth necessitating emergency neurosurgery.
  • Severe Symptoms: Debilitating headaches, vision changes, and neurological deficits.
  • Involved Surgery: Craniotomies posing risks and requiring extensive recovery periods.
  • Permanent Damage: Lasting cognitive, sensory, or motor impairments post-surgery.
  • Lifelong Monitoring: Continuous surveillance for recurrence and neurological management.
  • Repeated Interventions: Frequent need for additional surgeries or radiation therapy.

The biological mechanism linking Depo-Provera to meningiomas involves progesterone receptors found in more than 60% of these tumors, which can be stimulated by the synthetic hormone to promote abnormal cell growth and proliferation.

Unlike other Depo-Provera side effects that may resolve after discontinuation, meningiomas can continue growing even after stopping the injection, requiring ongoing medical surveillance and potentially multiple interventions throughout a patient’s lifetime.

If you’ve been diagnosed with a meningioma after using Depo-Provera, contact TruLaw immediately to discuss your potential for substantial compensation – time limits apply.

The discovery of golf ball-sized tumors in otherwise healthy young women has become a tragic pattern in Depo-Provera litigation, with many patients facing years of treatment and permanent disabilities from a preventable condition.

Fertility Problems and Reproductive Health Issues

Depo-Provera causes more prolonged fertility disruption than any other reversible contraceptive method, with some women experiencing delays of 18-24 months or longer before ovulation returns after their last injection.

While the manufacturer claims fertility effects are temporary, a notable percentage of former users report extended amenorrhea (absence of menstruation), irregular cycles, and conception difficulties that can persist for years after discontinuation.

The injection’s high-dose synthetic hormone completely suppresses the natural reproductive cycle, and for some women, normal function never fully returns, leading to expensive fertility treatments and, in some cases, permanent infertility.

Reproductive health complications linked to Depo-Provera use include, but are not limited to:

  • Extended Amenorrhea: Menstrual absence persisting over a year post-discontinuation.
  • Irregular Ovulation: Prolonged and unpredictable return to normal cycles.
  • Delayed Conception: Extended delays averaging over a year before successful pregnancy.
  • Fertility Treatments: Need for expensive fertility assistance or interventions.
  • Potential Infertility: Apparent permanent fertility loss despite no prior issues.
  • Youth Impact: Heightened risks for adolescents starting Depo-Provera during developmental years.

Research indicates that women who began using Depo-Provera as teenagers face the highest risk of prolonged fertility problems, as the injection disrupts normal reproductive development during maturation periods.

The emotional and financial toll of unexpected infertility can be devastating for women who chose Depo-Provera believing it was a temporary, reversible contraceptive option.

If you’ve struggled with infertility or required fertility treatments after stopping Depo-Provera, TruLaw may be able to help you seek compensation for medical expenses and emotional damages.

However, these damages are different than the damages cited in the Depo Provera MDL – please contact us to see if we’re able to assist you!

Unlike other contraceptive methods where fertility typically returns within 1-3 months, Depo-Provera’s prolonged effects represent a hidden cost that many women weren’t adequately warned about when choosing this contraceptive option.

Current Status of the Depo Provera Litigation

The Depo Provera MDL has rapidly evolved from isolated individual cases to a major federal multidistrict litigation, reflecting the strength of scientific evidence and the growing number of women coming forward with meningioma diagnoses.

As of June 2025, over 290 new Depo Provera lawsuits have been consolidated into MDL 3140 in the Northern District of Florida under Judge M. Casey Rodgers, who has a proven track record of efficiently managing pharmaceutical litigation in federal court.

Overview of Depo Provera Birth Control Shot; Primary Health Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Types of Injuries and Conditions Associated with Depo Provera UsageHealth Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Current Status of the Depo Provera Litigation

The litigation is progressing at an unusually fast pace with aggressive discovery deadlines, pilot case selections, and bellwether trial preparations that suggest potential settlement discussions could begin within the next 18-24 months.

Individual Lawsuits vs. Multidistrict Litigation (MDL)

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation officially decided to consolidate Depo Provera lawsuits into MDL 3140 on February 7, 2025, after both plaintiffs and Pfizer agreed that consolidation was necessary to manage the growing number of similar claims efficiently.

Unlike a Depo Provera class action lawsuit where all plaintiffs are treated as a single group, the Depo Provera multidistrict litigation (MDL) allows each woman to maintain her individual case while benefiting from coordinated pretrial proceedings, shared discovery, and unified legal strategies against Pfizer.

Judge Rodgers has already appointed experienced plaintiff leadership teams and selected five pilot cases for early trial preparation, demonstrating the court’s commitment to moving the litigation forward rapidly.

Benefits of consolidating multiple Depo Provera lawsuits into an MDL include:

  • Efficient Discovery: Coordinated evidence gathering benefiting all cases.
  • Unified Expert Evidence: Consistent medical and scientific testimony across cases.
  • Standardized Rulings: Uniform judicial decisions on central legal matters.
  • Bellwether Trials: Early test cases guiding potential settlement negotiations.
  • Cost Reduction: Shared legal strategies and expenses across plaintiffs.
  • Accelerated Resolution: Faster timelines compared to dispersed individual lawsuits.

While the federal MDL handles pretrial proceedings, notable state court litigation is also developing in Pennsylvania, California, and Illinois, where plaintiffs may choose to file for strategic advantages, such as more favorable laws regarding innovator liability.

If you’ve been diagnosed with a meningioma after using Depo-Provera, TruLaw can help you work through both federal and state court options to optimize your potential compensation.

Judge Rodgers has appointed liaison counsel to coordinate between federal and state proceedings, ensuring that discovery and legal developments benefit all plaintiffs regardless of which court system their case proceeds through.

Notable Cases and Settlement History

The first Depo-Provera lawsuit was filed in October 2024 by Monique Jones, a California woman who developed a cerebral meningioma after using Depo-Provera injections from 2005 to 2021, establishing the foundation for the legal theories being pursued in current litigation.

Jones’s case highlighted key issues including Pfizer’s failure to warn about brain tumor risks despite decades of scientific evidence, the company’s decision to continue marketing the higher-dose intramuscular formulation over safer alternatives, and the devastating impact of meningiomas on young women’s lives.

Subsequent cases have followed similar patterns, with many plaintiffs requiring emergency brain surgery, experiencing permanent neurological damage, and facing ongoing medical monitoring and treatment.

Major developments in the Depo Provera shot lawsuit include, but are not limited to:

  • First Lawsuit Filed: October 2024, establishing a precedent for failure-to-warn claims.
  • Rapid Case Growth: Increasing from single digits to over 290 cases within eight months.
  • International Regulatory Actions: Meningioma warnings mandated in the EU, UK, and Canada.
  • Pfizer’s Awareness: Pfizer admitting knowledge of meningioma risks without updating U.S. labels accordingly.
  • Previous Settlement Precedent: A $2.2 million settlement in Canada for bone density loss claims, demonstrating Pfizer’s potential liability exposure.

Pfizer’s history with Depo-Provera litigation includes a substantial 2021 settlement in Canada worth over $2 million for failing to adequately warn about bone mineral density loss, establishing precedent for the company’s willingness to settle rather than face extensive trial exposure.

The current meningioma litigation presents far more serious injuries and stronger scientific evidence than the bone density cases, suggesting substantially higher settlement values for successful claimants.

With Pfizer’s track record of settling pharmaceutical liability cases and the compelling evidence of brain tumor risks, TruLaw is prepared to fight for maximum compensation for our Depo-Provera clients.

The company’s acknowledgment of meningioma risks while failing to update U.S. warning labels provides strong evidence of corporate negligence that could support substantial punitive damages in addition to compensatory awards.

Legal Theories and Claims Being Pursued in the Depo Provera Shot Lawsuit

Depo-Provera lawsuits are primarily based on product liability theories including failure to warn, design defect, and negligent marketing claims that focus on Pfizer’s decades-long knowledge of meningioma risks without adequate disclosure to American consumers.

The failure-to-warn claims argue that Pfizer knew or should have known about the brain tumor risks as early as 1983 when initial studies linked progesterone to meningioma growth, yet the company failed to include appropriate warnings on U.S. product labels even after updating labels in other countries.

Design defect claims focus on Pfizer’s decision to continue marketing the high-dose 150mg intramuscular formulation when a safer 104mg subcutaneous alternative was available, suggesting the company prioritized profits over patient safety.

Overview of Depo Provera Birth Control Shot; Primary Health Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Types of Injuries and Conditions Associated with Depo Provera UsageHealth Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Current Status of the Depo Provera Litigation; Legal Theories and Claims Being Pursued in the Depo Provera Shot Lawsuit

The primary legal theories being pursued include, but are not limited to:

  • Failure to Warn Claims: Based on inadequate disclosure of meningioma risks.
  • Design Defect Arguments: Focusing on the unnecessary high-dose formulation.
  • Negligent Marketing Claims: Regarding promotion without adequate safety warnings.
  • Fraudulent Concealment Allegations: Related to withholding known risk information.
  • Learned Intermediary Doctrine Challenges: Where physicians weren’t properly informed.
  • Punitive Damage Claims: For willful disregard of patient safety in favor of profits.

Pfizer’s attempt to assert federal preemption defenses by claiming the FDA rejected their proposed meningioma warning faces legal challenges, as the company has provided no documentation of their alleged label change request or FDA response.

The preemption defense is particularly weak given that Pfizer successfully obtained approval for meningioma warnings in multiple international jurisdictions, suggesting the company could have pursued similar warnings in the United States if genuinely committed to patient safety.

TruLaw’s experienced pharmaceutical litigation attorneys are well-versed in defeating preemption defenses and will aggressively pursue all available legal theories to optimize your compensation.

The combination of strong scientific evidence, international regulatory acknowledgments, and Pfizer’s selective disclosure patterns provides multiple pathways for establishing liability and securing substantial damages for injured women.

Who Qualifies for a Depo Provera Lawsuit?

Determining eligibility for a Depo-Provera lawsuit requires meeting specific medical and legal criteria that establish both your use of the contraceptive and the development of qualifying injuries, particularly meningiomas diagnosed after receiving multiple injections.

The litigation primarily focuses on women who received at least two Depo-Provera injections and were subsequently diagnosed with intracranial meningiomas, though the strength of your case generally increases with longer duration of use and stronger medical evidence linking the injection to your diagnosis.

Overview of Depo Provera Birth Control Shot; Primary Health Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Types of Injuries and Conditions Associated with Depo Provera UsageHealth Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Current Status of the Depo Provera Litigation; Legal Theories and Claims Being Pursued in the Depo Provera Shot Lawsuit; Who Qualifies for a Depo Provera Lawsuit

Learning these requirements is vital for potential plaintiffs, as meeting the eligibility criteria substantially impacts both your ability to participate in the litigation and the potential value of your compensation.

Basic Eligibility Requirements

To sue Depo Provera, you must have received at least two injections of Depo-Provera (brand name), Depo-SubQ Provera 104, or an authorized generic version manufactured by companies such as Greenstone LLC, Prasco Laboratories, or A-S Medication Solutions, followed by a medical diagnosis of an intracranial meningioma.

The timing of your diagnosis is important, as most successful cases involve meningiomas discovered after starting Depo-Provera use, though the tumor may be diagnosed months or years after your final injection due to the slow-growing nature of these brain tumors.

Law firms handling these cases typically require documentation proving both your contraceptive use and meningioma diagnosis, with stronger cases involving longer duration of use, larger tumors, or more severe symptoms requiring surgical intervention.

Basic eligibility criteria for filing a Depo Provera claim include:

  • Documented Use of Depo-Provera: You must have received at least two injections of Depo-Provera (brand name), Depo-SubQ Provera 104, or an authorized generic equivalent.
  • Confirmed Diagnosis of Intracranial Meningioma: A medical diagnosis of an intracranial meningioma confirmed by imaging studies (MRI or CT scan) is required.
  • Use After 1992: Your use of Depo-Provera must have occurred after 1992, the year the drug became widely available for contraception.
  • No Prior History of Brain Tumors: You should have no prior history of brain tumors or meningiomas before beginning Depo-Provera use.
  • Temporal Relationship: Medical records should establish a temporal relationship between injection use and tumor development.
  • Exclusion of Other Causes: There should be an absence of other clearly identifiable causes for the meningioma development.

The strength of your case improves with extended Depo-Provera use, particularly if you received injections for more than one year, as the March 2024 BMJ study specifically identified increased risks with prolonged exposure.

If you meet these basic requirements and have been diagnosed with a meningioma, contact TruLaw using the chat on this page for a free case evaluation – we’re accepting cases nationwide and can help determine your eligibility within 24 hours.

Women who used Depo-Provera as teenagers or young adults may have particularly strong cases, as they were prescribed the injection during development periods without adequate warnings about long-term brain tumor risks.

Documentation Needed for Your Depo Shot Case

Successfully pursuing a Depo-Provera lawsuit requires comprehensive medical documentation that establishes both your contraceptive use and subsequent meningioma diagnosis, with medical records serving as the foundation for proving causation between the injection and your brain tumor.

This documentation includes complete medical records from all healthcare providers involved in your contraceptive care and tumor treatment, Depo Provera prescriptions or pharmacy receipts showing Depo-Provera injections, diagnostic imaging reports (MRI, CT scans) confirming your meningioma diagnosis, and surgical reports if you underwent brain tumor removal.

Documentation needed for your Depo-Provera case includes, but is not limited to:

  • Medical Records from Healthcare Providers: Complete medical records from gynecologists, family physicians, and specialists who administered injections.
  • Prescription and Pharmacy Records: Prescription history and pharmacy records showing Depo-Provera injection dates and dosages.
  • Diagnostic Imaging Reports: Diagnostic imaging reports (MRI, CT scans) with radiologist interpretations confirming meningioma.
  • Surgical and Pathology Reports: Surgical and pathology reports if you underwent tumor removal or biopsy procedures.
  • Neurological Evaluation Records: Neurological evaluation records documenting symptoms and treatment recommendations.
  • Insurance and Billing Statements: Insurance records and billing statements related to Depo-Provera and brain tumor treatment.

Obtaining comprehensive medical records can be challenging, particularly for women who used Depo-Provera many years ago or received care from multiple providers, but experienced attorneys can assist with record retrieval and may be able to work with incomplete documentation.

Judge Rodgers has issued special orders in the MDL to help streamline the medical record collection process, including provisions for obtaining pharmaceutical distribution records from Pfizer to help fill gaps in patient documentation.

TruLaw’s dedicated case investigation team specializes in medical record retrieval and can help you gather all necessary documentation even if you’ve moved, changed doctors, or lost some records.

Contemporary medical notes documenting your symptoms before diagnosis can be particularly valuable, as they help establish that your meningioma caused real functional impairment rather than being an incidental finding.

Statute of Limitations Considerations

The statute of limitations for Depo-Provera lawsuits varies by state, typically ranging from one to six years from the date of injury discovery, but several legal doctrines may extend these deadlines for women who couldn’t reasonably have known about the connection between their contraceptive and brain tumor until recent scientific studies were published.

The discovery rule, recognized in most states, allows the statute of limitations to begin when you discovered or reasonably should have discovered both your injury and its potential cause, which many legal experts argue couldn’t have occurred until the March 2024 BMJ study brought widespread attention to the Depo-Provera meningioma link.

Additionally, the doctrine of fraudulent concealment may further extend filing deadlines if Pfizer’s failure to warn about brain tumor risks prevented women from making the connection between their contraceptive use and subsequent health problems.

Factors that may affect statute of limitations deadlines include:

  • Application of the discovery rule, starting the clock when the injury’s cause becomes reasonably apparent.
  • Tolling due to fraudulent concealment if Pfizer intentionally failed to disclose known risks.
  • Tolling provisions for minors who used Depo-Provera before turning 18.
  • Continuing treatment rules for ongoing medical care related to meningioma.
  • Differences among states in personal injury and product liability limitation periods.
  • Federal preemption issues potentially influencing state deadlines.

Recent court filings in the MDL suggest that many Depo-Provera cases may benefit from extended statute of limitations deadlines, particularly given that Pfizer has acknowledged awareness of meningioma risks while failing to update U.S. warning labels despite modifying labels in other countries.

The equitable tolling principles may apply where Pfizer’s conduct prevented reasonable discovery of the claim, especially since the company continued marketing Depo-Provera without brain tumor warnings even after international regulatory agencies required such disclosures.

Don’t let statute of limitations concerns prevent you from seeking justice – TruLaw’s experienced pharmaceutical litigation attorneys can evaluate your specific situation and determine whether you have viable legal options regardless of when you used Depo-Provera or were diagnosed.

Acting quickly is still advisable even with potential deadline extensions, as gathering evidence and building a strong case takes time, and earlier filings often receive priority in MDL proceedings.

The Legal Process: What to Expect When Filing a Claim

Pursuing a Depo-Provera lawsuit involves a structured legal process that typically spans 2-4 years from initial filing to resolution, with most cases being handled through the coordinated MDL proceedings in the Northern District of Florida under Judge M. Casey Rodgers.

The litigation process follows a predictable timeline including initial case evaluation, comprehensive discovery, and either settlement negotiations or bellwether trials, with Judge Rodgers maintaining aggressive deadlines to prevent unnecessary delays that often plague pharmaceutical litigation.

Overview of Depo Provera Birth Control Shot; Primary Health Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Types of Injuries and Conditions Associated with Depo Provera UsageHealth Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Current Status of the Depo Provera Litigation; Legal Theories and Claims Being Pursued in the Depo Provera Shot Lawsuit; Who Qualifies for a Depo Provera Lawsuit; The Legal Process_ What to Expect When Filing a Claim

Initial Case Evaluation and Filing

The first step in pursuing a Depo-Provera lawsuit involves a comprehensive case evaluation where experienced attorneys review your medical history, Depo-Provera usage patterns, and meningioma diagnosis to determine case strength and potential compensation value.

During your initial consultation, you should bring all relevant medical records, prescription history, imaging studies confirming your brain tumor diagnosis, and any documentation of symptoms or treatment you’ve received related to your meningioma.

A qualified Depo Provera lawyer will evaluate factors including the duration of your Depo-Provera use, the size and location of your tumor, the severity of your symptoms, and the impact on your quality of life to determine your case’s potential value and likelihood of success.

The initial evaluation process will typically include:

  • Medical Records: Comprehensive review to verify Depo-Provera use and meningioma diagnosis.
  • Prescription Documentation: Analysis of pharmacy records confirming injection dates and frequency.
  • Diagnostic Evidence: Assessment of imaging and surgical reports confirming tumor specifics.
  • Symptom Documentation: Evaluation of medical complications and ongoing treatment requirements.

Most Depo-Provera attorneys work on a contingency fee basis, meaning you pay no upfront costs and legal fees are only collected if your case results in a successful settlement or verdict, typically ranging from 33-40% of any recovery.

If your case evaluation confirms eligibility, TruLaw will immediately begin gathering additional evidence and can file your lawsuit within 30-60 days to ensure you meet all statutory deadlines.

The filing process has been streamlined in the MDL, with Judge Rodgers allowing direct filing into the federal litigation to avoid transfer delays, and your Depo Provera lawsuit attorney will complete the required Plaintiff Proof of Use/Injury Questionnaire mandated by the court for all participants.

Discovery and Evidence Development

The discovery phase represents the most comprehensive and important portion of Depo-Provera litigation, involving extensive document exchange, depositions, and expert witness development that typically lasts 12-18 months under Judge Rodgers’ aggressive scheduling orders.

Pfizer must produce millions of internal documents related to Depo-Provera’s development, safety testing, marketing decisions, and knowledge of meningioma risks, while plaintiffs provide detailed medical records, expert medical opinions linking their tumors to Depo-Provera use, and testimony about the impact of their injuries.

The coordinated discovery process in the MDL benefits all plaintiffs by sharing the costs and evidence development across hundreds of cases, ensuring that even individual plaintiffs have access to powerful evidence against Pfizer.

The discovery phase in an MDL generally involves:

  • Corporate Documents: Pfizer’s internal documentation shows awareness of meningioma risks.
  • Expert Testimony: Medical experts establishing causation between Depo-Provera and brain tumors.
  • Plaintiff Depositions: Personal accounts detailing Depo-Provera use, symptoms, treatment, and life impact.
  • Corporate Depositions: Questioning of Pfizer executives and researchers about safety decisions.

Judge Rodgers has set tight discovery deadlines with key preemption discovery due by July 2025 and expert discovery on general causation scheduled for completion by early 2026, ensuring the litigation progresses efficiently toward bellwether trials.

The discovery phase often reveals the most damaging evidence against pharmaceutical companies, including internal emails and documents showing corporate knowledge of risks while failing to warn patients and physicians.

TruLaw’s experienced discovery team knows exactly what documents to request and which corporate witnesses to depose to optimize your case value, ensuring no stone is left unturned in building your claim.

Settlement Negotiations vs. Trial

Most Depo Provera lawsuit claims are expected to resolve through settlement negotiations rather than individual trials, with serious settlement discussions typically beginning after bellwether trial outcomes demonstrate Pfizer’s potential exposure to large jury verdicts.

The first bellwether trials are scheduled for late 2026 or early 2027, serving as test cases to evaluate how juries respond to evidence linking Depo-Provera to meningiomas and establishing potential verdict ranges that influence subsequent settlement negotiations.

If early trials result in substantial plaintiff verdicts, Pfizer will face increased pressure to reach a global settlement covering all MDL participants, potentially offering structured compensation based on factors such as tumor severity, treatment requirements, and life impact.

The resolution process typically involves, but is not limited to:

  • Bellwether Preparation: Selection and preparation of representative trial cases.
  • Settlement Discussions: Initiation following early trial outcomes indicating potential verdict ranges.
  • Mediation Proceedings: Facilitated negotiations by experienced settlement masters.
  • Case Valuations: Individual assessments based on medical severity, treatment costs, and life impact.
  • Global Settlement: Negotiations for a comprehensive settlement covering all MDL cases.
  • Trial Return: Individual jurisdiction trials if global settlement negotiations fail.

Pharmaceutical companies typically prefer settlement over the uncertainty and negative publicity of jury trials, particularly when facing strong scientific evidence and sympathetic plaintiffs with severe injuries like brain tumors requiring surgery.

TruLaw’s trial-tested attorneys are fully prepared to take your case to trial if necessary, but our track record of securing maximum settlements means we’ll fight for every dollar you deserve through negotiations first.

The combination of Judge Rodgers’ efficient case management, strong scientific evidence linking Depo-Provera to meningiomas, and the severity of brain tumor injuries creates optimal conditions for substantial settlement recoveries within the next 24-36 months.

Compensation Available in Depo Provera Lawsuits

Depo-Provera lawsuit compensation is designed to restore plaintiffs to the financial position they would have been in had they never been injured by the contraceptive, covering both quantifiable economic losses and intangible damages for pain and suffering caused by preventable brain tumors.

Current estimates suggest individual settlement amounts could range from $150,000 to over $1 million depending on factors such as tumor severity, treatment requirements, life impact, and the strength of medical evidence linking Depo-Provera use to the meningioma diagnosis.

The settlement figures and case outcomes discussed above are general estimates based on prior pharmaceutical litigation and should not be interpreted as guaranteed results.

The substantial compensation potential reflects both the severity of brain tumor injuries and Pfizer’s liability exposure for failing to warn American consumers about known meningioma risks while updating labels in other countries.

Overview of Depo Provera Birth Control Shot; Primary Health Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Types of Injuries and Conditions Associated with Depo Provera UsageHealth Concerns Leading to Legal Action; Current Status of the Depo Provera Litigation; Legal Theories and Claims Being Pursued in the Depo Provera Shot Lawsuit; Who Qualifies for a Depo Provera Lawsuit; The Legal Process_ What to Expect When Filing a Claim; Compensation Available in Depo Provera Lawsuits

Medical Expenses and Future Care Costs

Medical expense compensation in Depo-Provera lawsuits encompasses all healthcare costs related to meningioma diagnosis, treatment, and ongoing management, including emergency care, diagnostic imaging, neurosurgical procedures, radiation therapy, and lifetime medical monitoring required for brain tumor patients.

Treatment costs for meningiomas can exceed $700,000 before insurance coverage, with many patients requiring multiple surgeries, extensive rehabilitation, and specialized neurological care that continues indefinitely due to the risk of tumor recurrence.

Life care planning experts calculate future medical needs based on each patient’s specific diagnosis, treatment history, and prognosis to ensure adequate compensation for decades of potential medical care requirements.

Medical expenses potentially covered by compensation include:

  • Emergency Care: Costs for immediate medical intervention and hospitalization.
  • Diagnostic Imaging: Expenses for MRIs, CT scans, and specialized neurological assessments.
  • Neurosurgical Procedures: Costs of craniotomy, tumor resection, and repeat surgeries.
  • Oncological Treatments: Expenses for radiation therapy or chemotherapy if required.
  • Rehabilitation Services: Physical, occupational, and speech therapy costs.
  • Ongoing Medical Monitoring: Lifetime neurological consultations and follow-up imaging expenses.

The involved nature of brain tumor treatment often requires care from multiple specialists including neurosurgeons, neurologists, oncologists, and rehabilitation medicine physicians, all of which are recoverable as part of medical damages.

TruLaw works with leading medical economists and life care planners to ensure your settlement accounts for every dollar of current and future medical expenses related to your Depo-Provera injuries.

Health insurance liens and subrogation claims must be properly handled to optimize net recovery, and our experienced attorneys know how to negotiate with insurance companies to reduce these obligations and preserve more money for our clients.

Lost Wages and Earning Capacity

Economic damages for lost wages and diminished earning capacity can represent a substantial portion of Depo Provera lawsuit settlements, particularly for women whose careers were interrupted or permanently altered by brain tumor symptoms, surgical recovery, and ongoing neurological complications.

Many meningioma patients experience extended periods of disability during treatment and recovery, with some facing permanent cognitive changes, seizure disorders, or physical limitations that prevent return to their previous employment or reduce their ability to advance professionally.

Vocational economists calculate these losses by analyzing pre-injury earning history, career trajectory, educational background, and the specific functional limitations caused by the meningioma and its treatment.

Economic damages you may qualify to seek compensation for includes, but is not limited to:

  • Work Absences: Income lost during medical appointments, diagnosis, and treatments.
  • Extended Disability: Wage loss during surgical recovery and ongoing therapies.
  • Reduced Earning Capacity: Income reduction due to cognitive or physical limitations caused by treatment.
  • Lost Career Opportunities: Missed promotions and career advancements due to health-related restrictions.
  • Early Retirement: Economic losses from forced retirement or career shifts due to medical conditions.
  • Benefits Losses: Lost pensions and employment benefits resulting from disrupted career trajectories.

Women who used Depo-Provera as teenagers or young adults often face the most devastating earning capacity losses, as their brain tumors developed during career-building years, potentially affecting decades of future income.

The emotional and financial impact extends beyond the individual plaintiff to include family members who may need to reduce their own work hours to provide caregiving assistance.

TruLaw’s economic experts have successfully recovered millions in lost wage damages for pharmaceutical injury victims, and we’ll fight to ensure your settlement reflects the full scope of your economic losses both past and future.

Self-employed plaintiffs and those in non-traditional employment face unique challenges in proving income losses, but our attorneys have extensive experience documenting these damages through tax records, business records, and expert testimony.

Pain, Suffering, and Quality of Life Damages

Non-economic damages for pain, suffering, and diminished quality of life often represent the largest component of Depo-Provera settlements, reflecting the profound impact that brain tumors have on every aspect of a patient’s existence from the moment of diagnosis through lifetime management of their condition.

Meningioma patients endure not only the physical pain of tumor symptoms and surgical procedures but also the emotional trauma of facing a brain tumor diagnosis, the anxiety of potential recurrence, and the life-altering changes in personality, cognitive function, and relationships that often result from brain surgery.

These intangible losses are valued through various methods including per diem calculations, comparable jury verdicts, and the specific facts of each plaintiff’s experience and life impact.

Pain and suffering damages address, but are not limited to:

  • Physical Pain: Ongoing symptoms including headaches, seizures, and neurological impairments.
  • Emotional Distress: Psychological impact and anxiety from tumor diagnosis and recurrence concerns.
  • Trauma of Treatment: Emotional effects from invasive surgical procedures and associated risks.
  • Life Enjoyment Loss: Reduced ability to participate in daily activities, hobbies, and social interactions.
  • Relationship Impacts: Stress and disruption within family and marital relationships due to medical complications.
  • Permanent Scarring: Visible disfigurement resulting from surgeries and treatments.

The psychological impact of brain tumor diagnosis cannot be overstated, with many patients experiencing post-traumatic stress, depression, and anxiety that requires ongoing mental health treatment and affects their ability to enjoy life.

Young women face particular emotional devastation when brain tumors interfere with childbearing plans, career aspirations, and normal life milestones, creating damages that extend far beyond mere medical costs.

TruLaw knows that no amount of money can truly compensate for the trauma of a preventable brain tumor, but we’ll fight relentlessly to ensure you receive maximum compensation for every aspect of your suffering.

TruLaw: Accepting Clients for the Depo Provera Lawsuit

Depo Provera lawsuits are being filed by individuals across the country who suffered serious bone density loss and other health complications after receiving the contraceptive injection.

TruLaw is currently accepting clients for the Depo Provera lawsuit.

A few reasons to choose Depo Provera lawsuit lawyers at TruLaw for your case include:

  • If We Don’t Win, You Don’t Pay: The attorneys handling Depo Provera lawsuits at TruLaw and our partner firms operate on a contingency fee basis, meaning we only get paid if you win.
  • Expertise: We have decades of experience handling dangerous drugs cases similar to the Depo Provera lawsuits.
  • Successful Track Record: TruLaw and our partner law firms have helped our clients recover billions of dollars in compensation through verdicts and negotiated settlements.

If you or a loved one has experienced health problems after receiving Depo Provera injections, 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 join others in filing a Depo Provera lawsuit today.

Depo-Provera Lawsuit Frequently Asked Questions

  • How much does it cost to file a Depo Provera lawsuit?

    Filing a Depo-Provera lawsuit costs nothing upfront, as experienced pharmaceutical litigation attorneys handle these cases on a contingency fee basis where legal fees are only paid from successful settlements or verdicts, typically ranging from 33-40% of any recovery.

    This arrangement ensures that financial constraints don’t prevent injured women from accessing high-quality legal representation, as law firms advance all case expenses including court filing fees, expert witness costs, medical record retrieval, and litigation expenses without requiring any payment from clients unless the case succeeds.

    If your case doesn’t result in a settlement or verdict, you owe nothing to your attorney, making the decision to pursue legal action risk-free from a financial standpoint.

  • How long do Depo Provera lawsuits typically take to resolve?

    Depo-Provera lawsuits typically take 2-4 years to resolve from initial filing to final settlement, with the coordinated MDL proceedings under Judge Rodgers’ efficient case management potentially accelerating timelines compared to individual litigation scattered across multiple courts.

    The first bellwether trials are scheduled for late 2026 or early 2027, and if these result in favorable outcomes for plaintiffs, global settlement discussions could begin immediately thereafter, potentially resolving most cases by 2027-2028.

    Pharmaceutical litigation typically involves variables including discovery disputes, expert witness preparation, and settlement negotiations that can affect individual case timelines, though Judge Rodgers’ aggressive scheduling orders suggest this litigation will progress faster than typical mass tort cases.

  • What if I used Depo Provera many years ago?

    Using Depo-Provera many years ago doesn’t automatically disqualify you from filing a lawsuit, as the discovery rule and fraudulent concealment doctrines may extend statute of limitations deadlines beyond the typical 2-3 year periods, particularly since the connection between Depo-Provera and meningiomas wasn’t widely known until the March 2024 BMJ study.

    Many successful plaintiffs in the current litigation used Depo-Provera in the 1990s and 2000s, with some receiving their last injection over a decade before their meningioma diagnosis, as these brain tumors often take years to grow large enough to cause symptoms.

    Legal experts argue that the statute of limitations shouldn’t begin running until patients could reasonably connect their brain tumor to Depo-Provera use, which wasn’t possible until recent scientific studies established the link.

  • Will my medical information become public if I file a lawsuit?

    Your medical information will remain largely private through protective orders and confidentiality provisions that are standard in pharmaceutical litigation, with only limited medical details potentially becoming public if your case proceeds to trial rather than settlement.

    Most discovery materials, medical records, and personal health information are covered by protective orders that prevent disclosure to anyone outside the litigation team, and even court filings typically use initials or case numbers rather than full names to protect plaintiff privacy.

    The coordinated MDL proceedings actually provide additional privacy protection by allowing cases to settle confidentially without individual trial exposure, and the vast majority of pharmaceutical cases resolve through settlement where medical details never become public record.

  • Can I still file a claim if I'm currently using Depo Provera?

    You can still file a Depo-Provera lawsuit if you’re currently using the injection and have been diagnosed with a meningioma, though you should consult with your healthcare provider about the safety of continuing the medication given your brain tumor diagnosis.

    Current users who have developed meningiomas often have the strongest cases because they demonstrate ongoing exposure to the risk factor, and many medical experts recommend discontinuing Depo-Provera upon meningioma diagnosis to prevent potential tumor growth stimulation.

    Never stop taking any prescribed medication without proper medical consultation, as your doctor needs to help you transition to alternative contraception safely while managing your brain tumor treatment appropriately.

  • What if I can't remember exact dates or find all my medical records?

    Missing some medical records or uncertainty about exact dates doesn’t disqualify you from filing a Depo-Provera lawsuit, as experienced attorneys can help reconstruct medical histories through various sources including pharmacy records, insurance claims, and medical provider databases.

    Judge Rodgers has issued special orders in the MDL to streamline medical record collection, including procedures for obtaining pharmaceutical distribution records from Pfizer that can help confirm product use even when patient records are incomplete.

    Attorneys routinely work with clients who have incomplete documentation, using medical timelines, family testimony, and available records to establish Depo-Provera use patterns, and even approximate injection dates are often sufficient to meet legal requirements for proving causation and establishing case eligibility.

Published By:
Jessica Paluch-Hoerman
Jessica Paluch-Hoerman

Managing Attorney & Owner

With over 25 years of legal experience, Jessica Paluch-Hoerman 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 the most reliable, accurate, and up-to-date legal information with our readers!

Additional Depo-Provera Lawsuit resources on our website:
All
FAQs
Injuries & Conditions
Legal Help
Military
Other Resources
Settlements & Compensation
You can learn more about this topic by visiting any of our Depo-Provera Lawsuit pages listed below:
Depo Provera Lawsuit Settlement Amounts
Depo Provera Lawsuit Sign Up | How to File A Claim
Depo Provera Long Term Side Effects
Depo Provera Shot Lawsuit
Depo Provera Use Linked to Brain Tumors
Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuit
Depo-Provera Lawsuit Side Effects: Brain Tumors, Meningiomas, & More
Depo-Provera Lawsuit: Symptoms Users Should Know
FAQ: Am I Eligible for a Depo Provera Lawsuit?
FAQ: Is There a Depo Provera Class Action Lawsuit?
FAQ: Is There a Lawsuit Against Depo Provera?
FAQ: Why Was Depo Provera Banned in 1978?
History of Depo Provera | Complete Timeline 1954 to Present
How Depo Provera Lawsuit Lawyers Can Help Your Claim
How to File A Depo Provera Lawsuit Claim
Pfizer Depo Provera Lawsuit
What is the Lawsuit Against the Depo Shot?
Who Qualifies to File a Depo Provera Lawsuit?
Why Are Depo-Provera Lawsuits Being Filed?
AFFF Lawsuit

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.

Depo Provera Lawsuit

Depo Provera Lawsuit claims are being filed by individuals who allege they developed meningioma (a type of brain tumor) after receiving Depo-Provera birth control injections.

A 2024 study found that women using Depo-Provera for at least 1 year are five times more likely to develop meningioma brain tumors compared to those not using the drug.

Suboxone Lawsuit

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 Lawsuits

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.

Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits

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 Lawsuit

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

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.

Do You
Have A Case?

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?

Other Depo-Provera Lawsuit Resources

All
FAQs
Injuries & Conditions
Legal Help
Military
Other Resources
Settlements & Compensation

Helpful Sites & Resources