Table of contents
- Latest Cardiac Catheter Lawsuit Updates
- September 8, 2026: Second Bellwether Jury Awards $40 Million
- May 8, 2026: Defense Verdict in First Bellwether Trial
- August 8, 2023: Cases Centralized as MDL 3081
- What Is Cardiac Catheter Litigation?
- Who May Be Affected?
- Reported Injuries or Damages
- Evidence to Preserve
- Filing Deadlines
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Has There Been a Settlement in the Port Catheter Lawsuit?
- Has the Bard PowerPort Been Recalled?
- What Does the Research Say About Port Catheter Defect Claims?
- Is a Cardiac Catheter Lawsuit a Product Case or a Malpractice Case?
Implanted port catheters, including the Bard PowerPort, are the subject of federal lawsuits. Plaintiffs allege the catheter can fracture, move, cause infection or form blood clots. They say the catheter part holds too much barium sulfate.
The cases are pending in two multidistrict litigations: MDL 3081 for Bard ports and MDL 3125 for AngioDynamics and Navilyst ports. The first bellwether trial ended in a defense verdict. The second ended in a $40 million verdict.
Bard denies that the PowerPort is defectively designed. MDL 3081 holds more than 3,000 lawsuits in the District of Arizona, according to Law.com on September 8, 2026, and more bellwether trials are scheduled.
Latest Cardiac Catheter Lawsuit Updates
September 8, 2026: Second Bellwether Jury Awards $40 Million
A jury in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona awarded $40 million to a New Mexico woman in the second bellwether trial over the Bard PowerPort. Law.com reported it on September 8, 2026 [1].
More bellwether trials are scheduled in MDL 3081, which Law.com says holds more than 3,000 lawsuits. The verdict is one jury’s decision in one case.
May 8, 2026: Defense Verdict in First Bellwether Trial
Law.com reported on May 8, 2026 that C.R. Bard won a defense verdict in the first bellwether trial over the PowerPort device [2]. A defense verdict means the jury ruled for the maker.
The trial began on April 21, 2026. It was the first of about 3,000 cases in the MDL. The cases allege the PowerPort devices are defective and lead to blood infections, thrombosis or fractures.
August 8, 2023: Cases Centralized as MDL 3081
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized the Bard implanted port catheter cases in the District of Arizona as MDL 3081 on August 8, 2023 [3].
The panel said centralizing the cases would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses. It also said centralization would promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
What Is Cardiac Catheter Litigation?
Cardiac catheter lawsuits here are the federal port catheter cases. MDL 3081 covers Bard ports, and a separate MDL 3125 covers AngioDynamics and Navilyst ports [4].
According to the Judicial Panel, plaintiffs allege the catheter is made with too much barium sulfate. They say this weakens the catheter. The Panel did not decide if that is true.
Who May Be Affected?
People who had an implanted port catheter placed for intravenous treatment may be affected, including those whose catheter later fractured or moved. Others developed an infection or a blood clot after the port was placed.
In 2019, two years after implant, one bellwether plaintiff needed emergency surgery after seven inches of her broken catheter lodged in her heart.
Your own device, injury and records decide whether you qualify, and only an individual legal review can sort that out.
Reported Injuries or Damages
Plaintiffs allege infection, catheter fracture, catheter migration and blood clots. These are claims in the cases, not proven medical findings. In the second bellwether case, the plaintiff alleged that a fractured PowerPort caused two heart attacks.
The FDA called a March 11, 2025 recall of the 4 Fr. Single Lumen PowerPICC Catheter Class 1. The tubing was out of specification, which could lead to leaks and infection [5].
Evidence to Preserve
Keep anything that shows which port you had, what happened to it and how it affected you:
- The device itself, or its remains, if it was removed and you were given it.
- The implant card or implant record showing the brand, model and lot number.
- Medical records, imaging and surgery reports connected to the port and any complication.
- Infection results and lab results taken after the port was placed.
- Pharmacy and billing records for treatment that used the port or followed a problem.
- Photographs of the port site, scars or any visible problem with the device.
- Messages with the hospital or the device maker about the port or your symptoms.
Filing Deadlines
Deadlines for filing an injury claim exist, and state law sets them. Your deadline depends on where you live, when the injury happened and when it was diagnosed.
Even a strong case can end if the filing window closes first. A lawyer can check which window applies to you, so ask promptly.
Frequently Asked Questions
Has There Been a Settlement in the Port Catheter Lawsuit?
No settlement has been announced in the port catheter lawsuit over the Bard PowerPort. Verdicts so far come from single bellwether trials. A verdict in one case does not set payments for the other lawsuits in the MDL.
Has the Bard PowerPort Been Recalled?
The Bard PowerPort has not been recalled for the catheter fracture issue. As of October 2026, no such recall has been announced. The March 2025 PowerPICC recall covers a different catheter, so it does not apply to the implanted PowerPort.
What Does the Research Say About Port Catheter Defect Claims?
The research on port catheter defect claims does not settle them. The Judicial Panel did not decide whether port catheters are defective, and its order recorded the allegation that too much barium sulfate in the catheter component reduces material integrity, which plaintiffs say leads to infection, fracture, migration and thrombosis.
Is a Cardiac Catheter Lawsuit a Product Case or a Malpractice Case?
A cardiac catheter lawsuit here is a product case rather than a malpractice case. Plaintiffs sue the device makers named in the MDL titles and allege the catheter itself holds too much barium sulfate.