A lawsuit accuses Becton, Dickinson and Company and its Bard subsidiaries of selling implanted port catheters, including the Bard PowerPort line, with too much barium sulfate in the catheter material. The excess is said to weaken the catheter over time.
Plaintiffs say the weak catheters can break, move inside the body, get infected, or cause blood clots. Some also say the makers did not adequately test the devices or monitor problems that came up after they went on the market.
These claims from patients across the country are grouped in one federal case before a single judge in Arizona. Trials are underway, and no wide settlement has been reached yet.
- Case or litigation name: MDL No. 3081, In re Bard Implanted Port Catheter Products Liability Litigation
- Defendants: Becton, Dickinson and Company; C.R. Bard, Inc.; Bard Access Systems, Inc.
- Court and docket number, when available: U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, No. 2:23-md-03081
- MDL number, judge, and case count, when an MDL exists: MDL No. 3081, transferee court the District of Arizona, before Judge David G. Campbell
- Filing date: August 8, 2023 (JPML transfer order centralizing the constituent actions into MDL No. 3081)
- Main allegations: Excess barium sulfate in the catheter material reduced integrity, causing infection, fracture, migration, and thrombosis; inadequate testing and adverse-event monitoring
- Products or people involved: Bard-manufactured TIVAD/port-a-cath devices, including the PowerPort line, implanted for long-term intravenous therapy
Table Of Contents
- Latest TIVAD Lawsuit Updates
- What Is TIVAD?
- Who May Be Affected?
- Reported Injuries or Damages
- Evidence to Preserve
- Filing Deadlines
- Frequently Asked Questions
- How Much Is the Average TIVAD Lawsuit Settlement?
- What Does the Research Say About TIVAD Catheter Failure?
- What Manufacturers Are Named in the TIVAD Litigation?
- Is the TIVAD Lawsuit Connected to a Product Recall?
- Are TIVAD Lawsuits Filed as Individual Cases or a Class Action?
- What Court Is Hearing the TIVAD MDL?
- References
Latest TIVAD Lawsuit Updates
September 1, 2026: JPML Confirms MDL No. 3081 Remains Active
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation tracks every federal case grouped this way. Its pending-dockets report confirmed MDL No. 3081 is still active. The case sits before Judge David G. Campbell in the District of Arizona [1].
The docket is numbered 2:23-md-03081. It groups TIVAD and port-catheter injury claims against Becton, Dickinson and Company, the parent of C.R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Access Systems, Inc. The claims move forward together for shared pretrial work.
August 8, 2023: JPML Centralizes TIVAD Claims into MDL No. 3081
The panel’s transfer order combined ten port-catheter cases from six districts, plus 38 more from 25 districts, into MDL No. 3081 in the District of Arizona, assigned to Judge David G. Campbell [2].
The panel found the cases share the same core question. Did the catheter material hold up over time? Combining the cases lets one court handle the shared pretrial work.
What Is TIVAD?
A 2022 international expert consensus says TIVADs “are primarily used for chemotherapy or parenteral nutritional support in patients with malignant tumors” [3].
One such device, the Vortex CT Port, was cleared by the FDA in early 2007. Its maker then was RITA Medical Systems [4]. Today’s devices, like the Bard PowerPort and AngioDynamics Vortex Port, work the same way.
Who May Be Affected?
You may be affected if you or a family member had a Bard TIVAD implanted. This includes the PowerPort line. Ports are used for chemotherapy or parenteral nutritional support that requires long-term IV access.
The case focuses on a broken catheter, a catheter that has moved, an infection, or a blood clot. These problems can start soon after the device is placed, or show up years later.
This page covers TIVAD devices in general. More detail on the Bard MDL and its trials is on Schmidt & Clark’s Bard PowerPort lawsuit page.
Whether a specific case qualifies for a claim still takes an individual legal review, since the facts of each implant and complication differ.
Reported Injuries or Damages
Complaints filed in the MDL list several alleged injuries. These are infection, a broken catheter, one that has shifted out of place, and blood clots. The complaints blame a catheter material they say does not last.
A 20-year single-hospital study of 165 TIVADs implanted in cystic fibrosis patients recorded complications, mainly occlusion, infection, and leakage, in 85 of the devices [5].
Every one of those complications led to device failure or discontinued use, and nearly all of the affected devices were then removed.
These points come from two places: complaints filed in court, and a clinical study of a different patient population. Neither one proves that a specific person’s injury was caused by a defect in their device.
Becton, Dickinson and Company has responded publicly, saying no Bard PowerPort device has been recalled for catheter fracture and that it will defend the MDL cases [6].
Evidence to Preserve
Keep these records if you believe a TIVAD injury may support a claim:
- The device’s model, lot, or serial number, and any implant card given at surgery
- Records of the surgery to place the device, and any surgery to remove or replace it
- Medical records that show the infection, fracture, movement, or clot, including any scans
- Photographs of any visible complication, such as swelling, redness, or a device that has shifted
- Messages or letters with your doctor or hospital about the device or the problem
These records show when the device was placed, what happened next, and how doctors treated the problem. Together, they help explain the timeline of your care.
Filing Deadlines
Deadlines to file a TIVAD injury claim depend on state law. They are not the same in every state, and they can be short.
The clock usually starts on the date the injury or its diagnosis is discovered. That discovery date is not always the date of implantation.
Missing that window can end a claim, no matter how strong the facts are. Anyone considering a TIVAD lawsuit should check the deadline with a lawyer soon.
Frequently Asked Questions
How Much Is the Average TIVAD Lawsuit Settlement?
There is no average TIVAD lawsuit settlement to report. The MDL moves forward through individual bellwether trials rather than a single shared fund, so no dollar figure covers every claim, and no one can promise what a case is worth in advance.
What Does the Research Say About TIVAD Catheter Failure?
TIVAD catheter-failure research comes from device-tracking studies rather than the lawsuits themselves. One 20-year, single-hospital study of TIVADs in cystic fibrosis patients followed 165 devices. It found a median device lifespan of about 1,441 days, or roughly four years, before failure.
What Manufacturers Are Named in the TIVAD Litigation?
The manufacturers named in TIVAD lawsuits vary by device. Becton, Dickinson and Company, along with the Bard entities it owns, is the defendant in the federal MDL. AngioDynamics, which made the Vortex Port line, is not a defendant in that case.
Is the TIVAD Lawsuit Connected to a Product Recall?
No, the TIVAD lawsuit is not built on a product recall. The devices remain on the market, and Becton, Dickinson and Company disputes the claims rather than pulling the product from sale.
Are TIVAD Lawsuits Filed as Individual Cases or a Class Action?
TIVAD lawsuits over the Bard and Becton Dickinson devices are filed as individual cases. This is not a class action. Each plaintiff keeps a separate case number, even though the claims share pretrial steps before one judge.
What Court Is Hearing the TIVAD MDL?
The court hearing the TIVAD MDL is the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. The presiding judge, David G. Campbell, also led an earlier Bard case, the Bard IVC Filters litigation, over a different device.
References
- https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/Pending_MDL_Dockets_By_MDL_Number-September-1-2026.pdf
- https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-3081-Transfer_Order-7-23.pdf
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10318320/
- https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf6/K062414.pdf
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2727812/
- https://www.bd.com/content/dam/bd-assets/na/peripheral-intervention/web-assets/us/documents/media_statement_port_mdl_final_20230808.pdf