Hernia Mesh Settlement (and beyond)

For several years, courts across the nation have been inundated with thousands of pending hernia mesh lawsuits. These product liability claims assert that hernia mesh implants from various manufacturers were defective, causing diverse complications post-surgery.

The lawsuits encompass multiple hernia mesh products produced by four medical device companies: Ethicon (a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson that has recently settled most of its lawsuits), C.R. Bard (now part of Beckton Dickinson), Covidien, and Atrium Medical Corp. Lawsuits against each defendant have been consolidated into distinct class action MDLs.

Hernia Mesh Lawsuit Updates

June 2, 2025: Mass tort watchers remember when Bayer announced an eye-popping $11 billion settlement to resolve the bulk of the Roundup cancer lawsuits. It sounded like the end. It was not. Thousands of new claims continued to be filed after that deal was inked. Courts stayed busy. Trials resumed. The litigation did not die—it just shifted. We are seeing a similar pattern play out now with hernia mesh.

The Bard litigation was supposed to be in its final phase. That is how Becton Dickinson sold it to shareholders. Sure, a major settlement deal last year resolved a large portion of the docket.

But the story did not end there. As of June 1, 24,074 active cases remain in the MDL. That is just a slight decrease from 24,078 in May, but do not mistake flat numbers for flatlining activity. Cases are being dismissed and filed at the same time. For every closed file, a new plaintiff steps forward.

Just like Roundup, the litigation has entered a second life. You won’t see a trial soon, and no one expects another Roundup-sized settlement in hernia mesh. But the path forward may have echoes of Roundup, which is the litigation that will seemingly never die.

May 9, 2025: Following the settlement announcement, it appears that the inflow of new cases into the Bard hernia mesh class action MDL has finally stopped. No new cases were added to the MDL during the month of April. The total number of pending cases still stands at 24,078.

April 11, 2025: Judge Saris just laid out the trial schedule for Patterson v. Covidien, with jury selection set for February 17, 2026, and a pretrial conference two weeks earlier on February 4. Both sides need to submit a joint pretrial memo by January 27, along with motions in limine, exhibit lists, and witness designations.

This bellwether case comes from Alabama. The plaintiff in Patterson says he got a defective Covidien Symbotex mesh implant back in 2017 and ended up needing another surgery after the mesh caused adhesions and a bowel obstruction. The suit says the mesh’s collagen layer broke down too early—something that’s at the heart of a lot of these cases.

Even though this trial only affects the parties involved, everyone will be watching closely. It’s the first time jurors will weigh in on these claims, and that could shape where things go next—especially with settlement talks heating up again. If Covidien isn’t ready to settle after this, Judge Saris could start sending cases back to their home courts for trial. The clock is ticking.

Summary of Hernia Mesh Lawsuits

A hernia mesh refers to a small net or mesh utilized by doctors in hernia surgeries to reinforce and fortify the muscle tissue wall. Given the commonality of hernia surgeries, thousands of these mesh implants are used annually.

Lawsuits are centered on permanent hernia mesh implants, distinct from dissolvable mesh. Unlike dissolvable mesh, permanent mesh is designed to remain inside the body indefinitely after implantation. Regrettably, several permanent hernia mesh implants exhibited design flaws leading to severe complications post-implantation.

Certain hernia mesh implants were not biologically inert, triggering the body’s immune system to attack them following implantation. Additionally, design imperfections caused many implants to irregularly adhere to adjacent tissues or organs. These complications resulted in serious injuries, often necessitating additional surgical intervention.

The plaintiffs in the hernia mesh lawsuits claim that the mesh was defectively designed and manufactured, causing a number of complications such as pain, infection, mesh migration, mesh shrinkage, perforation of organs, and recurrent hernias. The plaintiffs further argue that Bard and other manufacturers failed to adequately warn of these risks and did not provide adequate instructions for safe use.

Bard Hernia Mesh Class Action

The hernia mesh lawsuits have been consolidated into several different class action MDLs for each specific mesh manufacturer. The biggest of these MDLs is the one involving C.R. Bard in the Southern District of Ohio. (In re: Davol, Inc./C.R. Bard, Inc., Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Lit. – MDL-2846)(the “Bard Hernia Mesh MDL”).

The Bard Hernia Mesh MDL was established in August 2018, so it has been pending for a long time. There are currently over 20,000 plaintiffs in the Bard Hernia Mesh MDL, making it the 3^rd biggest mass tort in the country.

Hernia Mesh Verdicts

To date, there have been four major test trials in the hernia mesh litigation. 3 of these were bellwether trials in the Bard Hernia Mesh MDL. The 4^th was a state court hernia mesh case that went to trial in Rhode Island.

The 3 bellwether trials in federal court resulted in 2 solid victories for the plaintiffs and 1 loss. The first trial ended in a defense verdict. The second trial yielded a $225,000 verdict for the plaintiff and the third bellwether trial gave us a $500,000 verdict. The biggest win for the hernia mesh plaintiffs came in the Rhode Island state court trial, which produced a massive verdict of $4.8 million.

Currently, the hernia mesh plaintiffs are actively pushing for more cases to go to trial because this is the only way to force Bard into negotiating a global settlement to resolve all of the pending cases.

Settlement Value of Hernia Mesh Lawsuits

The Bard hernia mesh litigation has reached a significant milestone with a substantial settlement agreement. Becton Dickinson (BD), the parent company of C.R. Bard, has agreed to resolve approximately 38,000 lawsuits related to its hernia mesh products. The total payout for this settlement is estimated to exceed $1 billion, marking one of the largest resolutions in medical device litigation history.

The settlement offers claimants three compensation options based on the severity of their injuries:

Quick-Pay 1: For claimants without qualifying injuries, offering a fixed amount of $2,500.
Quick-Pay 2: For those with mild to moderate injuries, such as a single surgery, providing a fixed amount of $25,000.
Traditional Pay: For claimants with severe injuries, including multiple surgeries or permanent disability, with payouts ranging from $60,000 to over $100,000.

The settlement is structured to distribute payments over several years, with the first disbursements expected to begin in 2025. Special masters appointed by both federal and state courts will oversee the administration of claims to ensure a uniform process for all plaintiffs.+2

It’s important to note that BD has not admitted any wrongdoing as part of this settlement and plans to defend against any remaining individual cases. Despite the settlement, new lawsuits continue to be filed, and plaintiffs have the option to opt out of the settlement and pursue individual litigation, though trial dates for these cases may be delayed until 2029 or later. Our law firm is still taking new cases.

What the Bard Settlement Means

The newly finalized Bard hernia mesh settlement brings long-awaited relief for many, but it also highlights just how complex mass tort resolution has become. While over 38,000 claims are covered under the $1 billion-plus deal, the settlement is not a one-size-fits-all solution. The tiered payment structure means that individual compensation varies widely based on medical history, surgical outcomes, and supporting documentation. For plaintiffs with minimal injuries or limited records, the Quick-Pay routes offer a fast but relatively modest payout. Those with severe complications may qualify for significantly larger awards under Traditional Pay, but they will likely face longer processing timelines.

It is also important to note what this settlement does not do: it does not shut the door on new claims. Cases are still being filed, and many plaintiffs—especially those with complex injuries or incomplete documentation—may opt out of the settlement in hopes of securing a better outcome through trial or future negotiations. Bard, for its part, has admitted no wrongdoing and intends to continue defending itself in unresolved claims. In short, while this agreement is a major milestone, it does not mark the end of Bard’s hernia mesh legal troubles—it simply changes the battlefield.

Contact Us About Your Hernia Mesh Case

It is not too late to file your hernia mesh lawsuit. If you were injured by a defective hernia mesh implant, free consultation at 800-322-3010 or get a free online consultation.