Depo Provera Lawsuit Sign Up | How to File A Claim

TruLaw is actively accepting clients for the Depo-Provera meningioma litigation through their instant case evaluation tool, with cases being consolidated into MDL-3140 in the Northern District of Florida under Judge M. Casey Rodgers.

The sign-up process involves confirming eligibility based on your injection history and meningioma diagnosis, gathering comprehensive medical documentation, and working with experienced attorneys who partner with mass tort litigation leaders to maximize compensation potential for women harmed by this contraceptive injection.

Initial Case Evaluation and Instant Eligibility Check

TruLaw’s chatbot instant case evaluation feature provides immediate feedback on your eligibility by assessing key factors including your injection history, meningioma diagnosis timing, and medical treatment received for your brain tumor.

This can eliminate lengthy phone consultations by quickly determining whether you meet the basic criteria for filing a claim, allowing you to understand your legal options within minutes rather than days or weeks.

The information that will help with an initial assessment includes:

• Injection History: Dates of Depo-Provera use spanning first injection through discontinuation
• Diagnosis Documentation: Meningioma diagnosis date with tumor grade (I, II, or III classification)
• Treatment Details: Surgical intervention, radiation therapy, or active monitoring protocols
• Current Symptoms: Neurological disabilities including seizures, vision loss, or cognitive impairment
• Provider Information: Names and locations of medical facilities administering injections
• Insurance Records: Coverage details for Depo-Provera prescriptions and claims
• Generic Versions: Documentation of authorized generic manufacturers (Greenstone, Viatris, Prasco)
• Usage Duration: Total number of injections received and frequency of administration
• Imaging Timeline: Dates of MRI or CT scans showing tumor discovery and progression

With over 550 cases currently pending in the MDL and the BMJ study showing a 5.6-fold increased risk for prolonged users, early case evaluation helps preserve your rights before state-specific statute of limitations expire.

Required Documentation for Your Depo Provera Claim

Comprehensive medical documentation forms the foundation of a successful Depo-Provera claim, requiring records that definitively prove at least two injections and a confirmed meningioma diagnosis through brain imaging studies.

The BrownGreer MDL Centrality system, appointed as the official data administrator for this litigation, has established specific documentation requirements that all plaintiffs must meet within 120 days of filing their case or face potential dismissal.

The MDL requires comprehensive documentation proving both exposure and injury through:

• Medical Records: Injection administration dates showing 150mg intramuscular or 104mg subcutaneous doses
• Imaging Results: MRI or CT scan reports with radiologist interpretation confirming meningioma
• Surgical Documentation: Operative notes detailing craniotomy procedures and tumor location
• Prescription Records: Pharmacy dispensing logs spanning entire contraceptive usage period
• Insurance Claims: EOB statements documenting injection coverage and administration codes
• Pathology Reports: Histological analysis confirming meningioma grade and cellular characteristics
• Specialist Consultations: Neurosurgeon and neurologist evaluation notes
• Disability Records: Social Security or employer documentation of work limitations

The BrownGreer MDL Centrality system enforces strict requirements including a 5-page limit for initial proof submissions per product and per injury, with all documents requiring proper bookmarking to identify relevant pages.

This standardized approach ensures efficient processing of claims while maintaining the integrity of evidence needed to prove both usage and injury, with deficiencies flagged for correction within ten business days to avoid Show Cause Orders from the court.

Working with TruLaw’s Depo Provera Attorneys

Jessica Paluch-Hoerman’s leadership at TruLaw brings decades of experience in pharmaceutical litigation, with the firm’s strategic partnerships with mass tort litigation leaders who specialize in product liability cases against major drug manufacturers.

TruLaw’s approach combines personalized attention with the resources of a nationwide legal network, ensuring each client receives individualized case management while benefiting from the collective expertise of attorneys who have successfully challenged pharmaceutical giants in previous litigation.

When you choose TruLaw for your Depo-Provera case:

• Contingency Fee Structure: No upfront costs with fees only collected from successful recoveries (33-40%)
• Personalized Management: Dedicated case coordinators providing regular updates throughout litigation
• Medical Expert Network: Access to neurologists and epidemiologists specializing in meningioma research
• MDL Coordination: Direct participation in MDL-3140 leadership committees and strategy sessions
• Case Progress Updates: Monthly communications regarding discovery milestones and settlement discussions
• Document Assistance: Court-authorized medical record retrieval for missing documentation
• Technology Platform: Digital case management system for real-time status tracking

TruLaw’s track record includes over $3 billion in verdicts and settlements across their partner network, demonstrating proven capability to take on major pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer and achieve meaningful compensation for clients injured by dangerous drugs.

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

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and determine whether you qualify to join others in filing a Depo-Provera Lawsuit today.

Eligibility for the Depo-Provera lawsuit depends on specific medical criteria that establish both product use and subsequent injury, requiring documented administration of the contraceptive injection followed by diagnosis of meningioma or other intracranial tumors.

Both brand name Depo-Provera manufactured by Pfizer and authorized generic versions produced by companies like Greenstone, Pharmacia & Upjohn, and Viatris qualify for legal action, with stronger cases typically involving extended use patterns of one year or more based on the BMJ study’s findings of 5.6-fold increased risk.

Core Eligibility Criteria for Filing a Claim

The fundamental requirement for filing a Depo-Provera lawsuit involves receiving at least two injections of Depo-Provera (brand name or authorized generic from manufacturers including Pfizer, Greenstone, Pharmacia & Upjohn, or Viatris) followed by diagnosis of meningioma, establishing both product exposure and resulting injury.

Law firms are currently evaluating cases where women developed brain tumors after receiving the contraceptive injection, with eligibility assessments focusing on the temporal relationship between usage and diagnosis rather than requiring a specific number of years between exposure and tumor development.

Qualifying factors for a Depo-Provera claim involve:

• Injection Requirements: Minimum two doses of 150mg intramuscular or 104mg subcutaneous formulation
• Meningioma Diagnosis: Intracranial tumor confirmed through MRI or CT imaging after usage began
• WHO Tumor Grade: Grade I (78-81% benign), Grade II (15-20% atypical), or Grade III (1-4% malignant)
• Temporal Relationship: Clear timeline establishing contraceptive use preceded tumor development
• Extended Usage Pattern: One year or more increases claim strength (5.55-fold risk per BMJ)
• Medical Intervention: Surgery, radiation therapy, or documented active monitoring protocols
• Authorized Generics: Greenstone, Viatris, Pharmacia & Upjohn versions equally qualifying

With approximately 24.5% of sexually active women in the United States having used Depo-Provera between 2015 and 2019 according to CDC data, those with prolonged use face elevated risk based on the 2024 BMJ study demonstrating a 5.6-fold increased likelihood of developing meningiomas.

This substantial user base combined with the high relative risk creates a large pool of potentially eligible plaintiffs, particularly among women who relied on the injection for extended periods as their primary contraceptive method.

Medical Evidence Requirements and Diagnosis Documentation

Confirmed meningioma diagnosis through brain imaging studies such as MRI or CT scans forms the cornerstone of medical evidence required for Depo-Provera claims, along with comprehensive medical records establishing the timeline between contraceptive use and tumor discovery.

The BrownGreer MDL system requires plaintiffs to submit proof of both product use and injury within 120 days of filing, necessitating organized documentation that clearly demonstrates the causal relationship between Depo-Provera exposure and subsequent brain tumor development.

Required medical evidence for your claim involves:

• Imaging Studies: MRI with contrast or CT scan showing meningioma location and size measurements
• Pathology Documentation: Histological confirmation if biopsy performed (Grade I, II, or III)
• Tumor Characteristics: Size measurements, growth rate calculations, and anatomical location
• Treatment Records: Craniotomy operative reports, radiation therapy plans, or monitoring schedules
• Symptom Documentation: Headaches (frequency/severity), seizures, vision changes, cognitive deficits
• Specialist Reports: Neurosurgery, neuro-oncology, or neurology consultation findings
• Timeline Evidence: Symptom onset dates correlating with injection history
• Emergency Records: Initial presentation documentation if acute symptoms prompted diagnosis

While meningiomas are classified as benign tumors in approximately 80% of cases, they can cause serious complications including persistent headaches, seizures, vision problems, memory issues, personality changes, and motor weakness that require invasive treatments impacting quality of life.

Even Grade I meningiomas may necessitate craniotomy procedures, radiation therapy, or lifelong monitoring, creating substantial medical expenses and ongoing health concerns that form the basis for damage claims in this litigation.

Factors That May Disqualify Your Claim

Certain circumstances may prevent eligibility for Depo-Provera litigation, primarily involving timing issues, insufficient product exposure, lack of documentation, or alternative causation factors that could weaken the established connection between contraceptive use and meningioma development.

Disqualifying factors for Depo-Provera claims (among others):

• Single Injection Only: Less than two total administrations fails minimum exposure requirement
• Pre-existing Diagnosis: Meningioma identified before first Depo-Provera injection date
• Statute Limitations: State deadlines expired without applicable discovery rule extensions
• Documentation Gaps: Unable to obtain medical records proving injection administration
• Genetic Conditions: Neurofibromatosis type 2 or other hereditary tumor syndromes
• Alternative Contraceptives: Exclusive use of other hormonal methods without Depo-Provera
• Radiation History: Prior therapeutic head/neck radiation explaining tumor development
• Temporal Disconnect: No reasonable timeline linking contraceptive use to diagnosis

The recent publication of scientific evidence linking the contraceptive to brain tumors may trigger new limitation periods for women previously unaware of the causal relationship, making prompt legal consultation advisable to preserve potential claims.

If you or a loved one used Depo-Provera and developed a meningioma but are unsure about eligibility due to timing or documentation issues, you may still have a viable claim.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and determine whether you qualify to join others in filing a Depo-Provera Lawsuit today.

The process has been streamlined through MDL-3140 consolidation under Judge M. Casey Rodgers in the Northern District of Florida, creating a coordinated approach that benefits plaintiffs by pooling resources and establishing consistent procedures across all federal cases while maintaining individual claim integrity.

Initial Consultation and Case Assessment Process

The free consultation process begins with attorneys evaluating your case strength by thoroughly reviewing your medical history, Depo-Provera usage patterns, and injury severity to determine the most effective legal strategy for maximizing compensation.

During this initial first step, experienced attorneys assess whether your case meets the eligibility criteria established by the MDL leadership and determine the best venue for filing, whether through direct MDL participation or state court proceedings in jurisdictions like Pennsylvania or New York.

Experienced attorneys can help you determine your eligibility to file a claim assessing the following details:

• Medical Timeline Review: Comprehensive analysis of injection dates through meningioma diagnosis
• Damage Assessment: Calculation of medical expenses, lost wages, and pain/suffering valuation
• MDL Process Explanation: Timeline projections, bellwether trial significance, and settlement expectations
• Fee Structure Discussion: Contingency arrangements typically 33-40% of recovery amount
• Co-counsel Coordination: Integration with MDL leadership committees for strategic advantage
• Evidence Preservation: Immediate steps to secure medical records before retention periods expire
• Limitations Analysis: State-specific deadline calculations with discovery rule applications

Initial consultations typically conclude within 24-48 hours, providing prompt feedback about case viability while attorneys deliver honest assessments regarding potential compensation ranges based on similar pharmaceutical mass tort outcomes.

This rapid evaluation process allows plaintiffs to make informed decisions about proceeding with litigation while ensuring compliance with the 120-day deadline for submitting proof of use and injury questionnaires required by the MDL court.

Formal Filing and MDL Integration

Individual lawsuits begin with filing in federal district court followed by transfer to MDL-3140 in the Northern District of Florida, where Judge M. Casey Rodgers oversees coordinated pretrial proceedings designed to efficiently manage the growing caseload.

The centralization process eliminates duplicative discovery, prevents inconsistent pretrial rulings, and conserves resources for all parties while preserving each plaintiff’s right to individual compensation based on their specific injuries and circumstances.

Filing process steps involve:

• Complaint Preparation: Detailed allegations including failure to warn and strict product liability
• Jurisdiction Selection: Federal district court filing with proper venue establishment
• Transfer Motion: Automatic JPML coordination to MDL-3140 in Northern District of Florida
• Case Management Integration: Assignment to master docket with standardized procedures
• Plaintiff ID Number: Unique identifier for BrownGreer tracking system
• Proof Questionnaire: 120-day deadline for submission via official MDL portal
• Discovery Participation: Integration into coordinated document production protocols

As of July 2025, over 550 cases are actively pending in the MDL with direct filing procedures now available, while parallel state court proceedings include 61 cases consolidated in New York and 11 in California, offering strategic alternatives for plaintiffs.

The monthly status conferences and established case management orders demonstrate the court’s commitment to moving this litigation forward efficiently, with new cases being added at approximately 20.4% monthly growth rate as awareness of the meningioma risk spreads.

Discovery Phase and Case Development

The extensive discovery process involves both sides exchanging evidence, with Pfizer having already produced over 10 million pages of internal documents while plaintiffs complete detailed questionnaires documenting their Depo-Provera usage patterns and resulting injuries.

This phase represents the most time-intensive portion of litigation, where scientific evidence, corporate knowledge, and individual medical histories converge to build the factual foundation for proving liability and damages in these brain tumor cases.

Discovery activities consist of:

• Fact Sheet Completion: Detailed injection history with pharmacy records and administration dates
• Medical Record Collection: Comprehensive gathering spanning contraceptive use through treatment
• Corporate Document Review: Analysis of 10+ million pages from Pfizer production
• Deposition Scheduling: Corporate representatives, treating physicians, and expert witnesses
• Leadership Committee Coordination: Plaintiff and defendant steering committee collaboration

These milestones set the stage for potential bellwether trial selection in late 2026 or early 2027, with the first test cases likely to influence settlement negotiations and establish valuation metrics for the thousands of cases expected to follow.

If you or a loved one is ready to begin the filing process after developing a meningioma following Depo-Provera use, time is of the essence to preserve your legal rights.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and determine whether you qualify to join others in filing a Depo-Provera Lawsuit today.

While definitive settlement values remain uncertain until bellwether trials establish precedent, legal experts project potential compensation ranges based on the severity of brain tumor injuries and comparable pharmaceutical mass tort outcomes, particularly the Yaz/Yasmin litigation that resulted in $1.6 billion total settlements.

The unique nature of meningioma injuries—requiring invasive brain surgery and causing permanent neurological damage—suggests Depo-Provera cases may command higher individual values than typical birth control litigation, with the added factor of Pfizer’s substantial financial resources enabling global settlement capacity.

Projected Settlement Ranges for Meningioma Cases

Estimated settlement ranges span from $75,000 to over $1,000,000 based on case-specific factors including tumor grade, surgical requirements, and permanent disabilities, with average values likely falling between $275,000-$500,000 for typical meningioma cases requiring medical intervention.

These projections reflect the severe nature of brain tumor injuries compared to other contraceptive side effects, with recent meningioma litigation studies showing average settlements of $867,555, though individual outcomes vary dramatically based on injury severity and long-term impacts.

Value factors affecting settlement amounts (notably):

• Tumor Classification: Grade I averaging $275,000, Grade II/III exceeding $500,000
• Surgical Requirements: Craniotomy procedures adding $100,000-$250,000 to base value
• Permanent Disabilities: Vision loss, seizure disorders, or cognitive deficits doubling compensation
• Age at Diagnosis: Younger plaintiffs receiving 30-50% higher awards for lost earning capacity
• Usage Duration: Each year beyond 12 months adding 15-20% to settlement value
• Medical Evidence Quality: Strong causation proof increasing awards by 40-60%
• Life Impact Severity: Total disability cases approaching $1 million settlements

Comparable birth control litigation provides instructive benchmarks, with Yaz/Yasmin cases averaging $220,000 per claim despite involving less severe injuries like blood clots and gallbladder disease, suggesting Depo-Provera brain tumor cases warrant substantially higher compensation.

The NuvaRing litigation averaged $26,300 for vaginal injuries, further emphasizing how meningioma cases involving craniotomies, radiation therapy, and permanent neurological damage justify settlement values potentially exceeding $500,000 for severe cases requiring extensive medical intervention.

Please be advised that any projected or estimated settlement amounts mentioned in this section are general estimations and are not guaranteed.

They are meant to provide a general idea of what settlement ranges could look like and should not be taken as definitive expectations for your case.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and discuss the potential value of your specific claim.

Types of Damages Available in Depo Provera Claims

Product liability law recognizes both economic damages representing quantifiable financial losses and non-economic damages compensating for intangible suffering, with Depo-Provera plaintiffs eligible to pursue comprehensive recovery addressing all aspects of their brain tumor injuries.

The calculation of damages requires careful documentation of past expenses while projecting future needs, particularly given the chronic nature of meningioma monitoring and potential recurrence requiring additional treatment over decades.

Damage categories in Depo-Provera claims feature research such as:

• Medical Expenses: Neurosurgery costs averaging $100,000-$250,000 for uncomplicated procedures
• Lost Wages: Median $75,000 annually with 5-10 year recovery periods common
• Pain and Suffering: Jury awards ranging $150,000-$500,000 for brain surgery trauma
• Emotional Distress: PTSD and anxiety damages averaging $50,000-$150,000
• Loss of Enjoyment: Permanent limitations valued at $100,000-$300,000
• Punitive Damages: Potential 3-5x compensatory awards if willful misconduct proven
• Consortium Claims: Spousal damages averaging $50,000-$100,000
• Rehabilitation Costs: Physical/occupational therapy totaling $30,000-$75,000 annually

Neurosurgery costs for meningioma removal routinely exceed $100,000 for uncomplicated procedures, with skull base tumors requiring specialized surgical teams potentially costing $250,000 or more, creating substantial economic damages before considering lifetime monitoring requirements.

The addition of radiation therapy, anti-seizure medications, cognitive rehabilitation, and potential revision surgeries transforms these cases into million-dollar claims when calculating total lifetime medical expenses, particularly for younger plaintiffs facing decades of ongoing care and lost productivity.

Please note that all monetary figures provided above for medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other damage categories are illustrative examples based on general injury valuations and should not be considered guaranteed amounts for any specific case.

If you or a loved one developed a meningioma requiring surgery or causing permanent disability after using Depo-Provera, the potential compensation may be substantial.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and determine whether you qualify to join others in filing a Depo-Provera Lawsuit today.

MDL-3140 proceedings as of July 2025 demonstrate rapid momentum with over 550 cases consolidated and a 20.4% monthly growth rate, establishing this litigation as one of the fastest-growing pharmaceutical mass torts currently active in federal court.

The litigation has entered a critical phase with active discovery underway, key motion practice scheduled, and Judge Rodgers implementing aggressive case management procedures designed to move these brain tumor claims toward resolution through either bellwether trials or global settlement negotiations beginning in 2026.

MDL-3140 Progress and Key Developments

The rapid expansion from initial MDL formation in February 2025 to over 550 cases by July represents unprecedented growth driven by widespread media coverage of the BMJ study findings and coordinated plaintiff attorney marketing efforts nationwide.

Judge M. Casey Rodgers has demonstrated commitment to inclusive leadership by specifically calling for female attorneys to participate in MDL committees, recognizing that this contraceptive litigation primarily affects women and benefits from diverse perspectives in case management decisions.

Key MDL developments to date demonstrate patterns like:

• BrownGreer Appointment: Official data administrator managing 550+ case inventories
• Direct Filing Implementation: Streamlined procedures avoiding transfer delays from originating courts
• 120-Day Requirements: Mandatory proof submissions maintaining case quality standards
• Defendant Dismissals: Prasco and Greenstone removed, focusing litigation on Pfizer
• Leadership Structure: Plaintiff/defendant committees with defined roles and responsibilities
• State Coordination: Protocols established with New York (61 cases) and California (11 cases)
• Monthly Conferences: Regular status updates maintaining 20.4% case growth momentum

The cooperative approach between plaintiff and defense counsel in establishing standardized procedures, including joint selection of BrownGreer and agreement on questionnaire formats, suggests both sides recognize the strong scientific evidence demands efficient resolution rather than protracted procedural battles.

This collaboration extends to discovery protocols, with Pfizer’s production of over 10 million pages proceeding without disputes, indicating the company may be positioning for eventual settlement negotiations rather than contested trials on every issue.

Critical Upcoming Deadlines and Court Dates

The September 29, 2025 hearing on Pfizer’s federal preemption motion represents the single most pivotal moment in this litigation, potentially determining whether thousands of state law failure-to-warn claims can proceed or face dismissal based on FDA regulatory history.

Pfizer’s argument that FDA rejection of prior labeling changes shields them from state tort liability faces challenges given recent Supreme Court precedent requiring clear evidence of FDA prohibition rather than mere regulatory inaction.

Important litigation milestones include tactics like:

• July 25, 2025: Preemption discovery deadline with critical document production
• September 29, 2025: Oral argument determining state claim viability (potentially case-ending)
• January 10, 2026: General causation expert reports establishing scientific foundation
• February 10, 2026: Daubert challenges testing expert witness admissibility
• Late 2026: Bellwether pool selection from 550+ pending cases
• Early 2027: First test trials establishing settlement values
• Monthly Conferences: 11:00 AM CT maintaining case progression momentum

Pfizer’s preemption defense centers on prior FDA decisions regarding meningioma warnings, arguing federal law prevents state courts from requiring warnings the FDA previously considered unnecessary, creating an “impossibility” defense to state law claims.

However, plaintiffs counter that new scientific evidence from the 2024 BMJ study fundamentally changes the risk-benefit analysis, that Pfizer failed to pursue label changes through proper channels, and that the company cannot hide behind regulatory decisions made without full knowledge of the brain tumor risks now established through epidemiological research.

Our Depo Provera attorney at TruLaw is dedicated to supporting clients through the process of filing a Depo Provera lawsuit.

With extensive experience in dangerous drugs cases, Jessica Paluch-Hoerman and our partner law firms work with litigation leaders and medical experts to prove how Depo Provera injections caused you harm.

TruLaw focuses on securing compensation for medical expenses, bone density treatment costs, pain and suffering, and other damages resulting from your Depo Provera injuries.

We understand the physical and emotional toll that Depo Provera complications have on your life and provide the personalized guidance you need when seeking justice.

Meet the Lead Depo Provera Attorney at TruLaw

Meet our lead Depo Provera attorney:

• Jessica Paluch-Hoerman: As founder and managing attorney of TruLaw, Jessica brings her experience in product liability and personal injury to her client-centered approach by prioritizing open communication and personalized attention with her clients. Through TruLaw and partner law firms, Jessica has helped collect over $3 billion on behalf of injured individuals across all 50 states through verdicts and negotiated settlements.

How much does hiring a Depo Provera lawyer from TruLaw cost?

At TruLaw, we believe financial concerns should never stand in the way of justice.

That’s why we operate on a contingency fee basis—with this approach, you only pay legal fees after you’ve been awarded compensation for your injuries.

If you or a loved one experienced health complications 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 and determine whether you qualify to join others in filing a Depo Provera lawsuit today.

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 TruLaw for your Depo Provera lawsuit include:

• If We Don’t Win, You Don’t Pay: The Depo Provera lawyers 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 lawsuit.
• 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.