Products Liability
This page discusses the NuvaRing lawsuits. This NuvaRing MDL class action lawsuit began in 2008 and closed in September. Most NuvaRing lawsuits were resolved with a $100 million settlement in 2014.
Most of the information on this page is dated. Our law firm is not taking new NuvaRing lawsuits.
NuvaRing is still on the market today, and it still has side effects and risks and continues to get mixed reviews from patients. But the warning is much stronger to reflect the side effects of NuvaRing and give doctors and patients the ability to make more informed choices.
- In 2024, over 1,500 Paragard lawsuits have been filed alleging the device fractures on removal due to a design defect
- Depo-Provera brain tumor lawsuits may be the next big birth control litigation
The NuvaRing (often misspelled as Nuva Ring or Newva Ring) is a low-dose hormonal, contraceptive device. It is manufactured by Organon, a Dutch pharmaceutical company purchased by Schering-Plough (which sells well-known products such as Dr. Scholl’s and Coppertone). It merged with Merck & Co. in 2009.
The NuvaRing is a small inter-vaginal device inserted by the user once a month to prevent pregnancy. Proponents of the NuvaRing advocate the ring’s low hormone dosage and its easy use compared to the pill’s daily regimen.
What is NuvaRing?
NuvaRing is a form of birth control that was developed and introduced by Organon International in 2001. NuvaRing is a ring inserted in a woman’s vagina once a month, releasing a low dose of hormones to prevent pregnancy.
The upside is that it is convenient to use. Unlike “the pill,” you don’t need to take it daily. There is a huge convenience factor at play for women who chose NuvaRing. Additionally, because it is inserted directly into the vagina, it may be less likely to cause gastrointestinal side effects that can occur with oral contraceptives.
NuvaRing is a small, flexible ring that is inserted into the vagina once a month. The ring releases a combination of the hormones estrogen and progestin, which work together to prevent ovulation and thus pregnancy.
NuvaRing is designed to be easy and convenient to use. Once inserted, it remains in place for three weeks, after which it is removed for a one-week break. During this time, the woman will typically have her menstrual period. After the one-week break, a new ring is inserted and the cycle begins again.
Risks Associated with the NuvaRing
Though presented as easy to use, daily dosing is not required; there are some mechanical issues with the device, and many cases of improper insertion, improper placement, and expulsion may be felt during sexual intercourse.
Improper insertion into the urethra has been documented and usually results in urinary tract infections.
Other reported side effects include headache, nausea, vaginitis, and leukorrhea (thick white to yellow vaginal discharge). Though these side effects are relatively minor and treatable, the NuvaRing also has the risk of more severe side effects.
NuvaRing contains ethinylestradiol and 3-keto-desogestrel, the active metabolite of desogestrel; Desogestrel is found in what is referred to as “third-generation” oral contraceptives. This class of oral contraceptives has been shown to increase a woman’s risk of thrombotic incidents to a greater degree than first or second-generation oral contraceptives, through thickening blood in the body resulting in clot formation.
Thick blood increases the risk of a thrombotic incident such as a stroke, infarction, blood clot, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism, or even in extreme cases, death. Much focus has recently been placed on combined oral contraceptives and their associated risk of deep vein thrombosis. Advocates for NuvaRing suggest that these implants are more effective than oral contraceptives and have a lower incidence of side effects.
However, studies have been published outlining the risks similar to those seen with oral contraceptives. In a review article on contraceptive vaginal rings, published in Contraception in 2010, the authors describe two cases of deep vein thrombosis in an open-label study conducted on 72 women. Several other studies have reported venous thrombotic embolisms.
Three incidents of deep vein thrombosis were reported in three other studies, totaling 1132 women. In 2009, a Cochrane review established the risk for deep vein thrombosis to be 149 in 100,000 (0.15%) for NuvaRing. The risk seems low. But it is a big deal extrapolated to the estimated 1.5 million users of the NuvaRing.
It is well-established that oral contraceptives can increase the risk of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. In NuvaRing users, the incidence of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis is rare but can occur. A case study published in 2011 in The Journal of Emergency Medicine describes one such case seen in the emergency department.
The World Health Organization’s Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2009 edition, recommends that the guidelines for prescribing combined oral contraceptives should extend to NuvaRing.
They recommend that women should not use NuvaRing if they have a history of venous thromboembolic events or current venous thromboembolic events or are undergoing surgery that may include prolonged immobilization.
The risk for acute venous thromboembolic events such as deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis is similar to that of third-generation combined oral contraceptives.
What Exactly is the Problem with NuvaRing?
NuvaRing releases the hormones estrogen and progesterone into the patient’s bloodstream. There is a concern that high levels of these hormones can cause blood clotting and other cardiac problems, most notably the formation of an embolus (a blood clot) that can cause pulmonary embolisms.
NuvaRing Lawsuit
These reports of problems led to lawsuits alleging that the manufacturer failed to warn users adequately about these risks. The first lawsuits were filed in 2008, with plaintiffs claiming that Organon, and later Merck & Co., which acquired Organon, downplayed the risks associated with NuvaRing
The NuvaRing’s manufacturer and related companies are the defendants: Organon USA, Inc., Organon Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., and Organon International, Inc. are being sued for not taking into account the higher level of hormone transference that occurs for users of the NuvaRing, and therefore not properly explaining the risk of using the NuvaRing in comparison to other methods of birth control such as the pill.
That contention is an umbrella for the negligence and consumer fraud that are also promulgated by Organon’s lack of disclosure on the potential dangers of the ring.
NuvaRing Lawsuit Timeline
- 2008: In 2008, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated federal NuvaRing lawsuits into an MDL in the Eastern District of Missouri. The consolidation aimed to streamline the pretrial process, handle a large number of cases efficiently, and reduce duplicative discovery
- 2012-2014: Extensive discovery phase involving document review, depositions, and expert witness testimony.
- 2014: Merck settles with over 3,800 plaintiffs for a total of $100 million, representing over 95% of cases in the MDL.
- 2015-2021: The remaining cases continue on an individual basis, with some trials resulting in victories for plaintiffs and others in favor of Merck.
- 2021: The Missouri MDL closes, but individual cases in other jurisdictions remain open
- 2021: Teva Pharmaceuticals has filed a lawsuit in New York state court claiming that it is owed over $31 million by Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories for breach of contract and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. According to Teva, Dr. Reddy’s refused to pay for batches of a generic version of the birth control device NuvaRing, called Veraring.
What Is the Current Status of NuvaRing Lawsuits?
So there were a large a number of lawsuits in this NuvaRing litigation. The Defendants wer Organon USA, Inc., Organon Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., and Organon International, Inc. NuvaRing plaintiffs’ lawyers are contended that there was (1) failure to warn the public and the medical community of known and potential dangers of the drug in violation of NJPLA; (2) breach of warranty; (3) negligence; (4) consumer fraud; and (5) common law fraud.
Plaintiff’s lawyers alleged that the manufacturer Nuvaring had a higher risk of cardiovascular thromboembolic complications than the pill, due to the markedly potentiated androgenic effects caused by the synthetic progestin used in the Nuvaring. Plaintiffs also sought punitive damages which are available in these types of cases in some jurisdictions.
The NuvaRing lawsuits were consolidated in an MDL (Multidistrict Litigation) on August 22, 2008. There were also a large number of cases pending in New Jersey state court. The MDL closed out in September 2021.
Merck Is No Stranger to Mass Tort Lawsuits
Merck is a frequent flyer in mass tort litigation with huge MDLs. One of the most infamous Merck lawsuits involved Vioxx (Rofecoxib), a pain medication that was withdrawn from the market in 2004 due to its association with increased risks of heart attacks and strokes. This led to tens of thousands of lawsuits and a $4.85 billion settlement in 2007. Another product, Fosamax (Alendronate), intended to treat and prevent osteoporosis, was linked to severe bone fractures and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), resulting in numerous individual and class action lawsuits.
Additionally, Gardasil, a vaccine designed to prevent human papillomavirus (HPV) infections, has been the subject of lawsuits alleging severe side effects such as autoimmune disorders and neurological issues. Propecia, a drug for treating male pattern baldness, has been linked to persistent sexual dysfunction and depression, leading to numerous lawsuits from affected men. Januvia and Janumet, used to manage type 2 diabetes, have been associated with an increased risk of pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer, resulting in both individual and class action lawsuits.
Furthermore, Zostavax, a vaccine intended to prevent shingles, has faced litigation due to reports of serious side effects, including shingles outbreaks, vision loss, and hearing loss. Plaintiffs in these cases claim that Merck failed to provide adequate warnings about the potential risks of these medications and vaccines. These controversies highlight the ongoing challenges Merck encounters related to product safety and the complexities of pharmaceutical development and marketing. The company continues to address the legal and reputational impacts of these and other products.
Fairness requires us to point out that Merck successfull defended most of these lawsuits and was able to resolve the majority of these cases for no or relatively insignificant settlement amounts.
The NuvaRing Settlement
There were many lawsuits filed in the NuvaRing litigation. The victims typically had cardiac problems in women such as strokes, heart attacks, blood clots, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolisms, and in some extreme cases, even death.
Merck settled these case for $100,000,000 in 2014 with 3,800 plaintiffs. The vast majority of victims who brought claims — over 95% — agreed to join the settlement. Today, are not handling NuvaRing cases and we do not know any lawyers that are.
Why are lawyers no longer seeking NuvaRing cases? The biggest reason is that Merck changed the label in 2013 to better warn of the NuvaRing risks (see 5.1).
- Mirena IUD (drug companies struggle to make quality birth control devices and Mirena is another example)
The settlement in these cases was for $100,000,000. That sounds like a lot of money. But it is not. How much is it for the average victim? It is about $60,000 per case. Why did the Yaz cases settle for over $200,000 on average? Well, there were some differences that were important that are not worth getting into here. But those differences should not have equaled dividing the Yaz numbers.
Does this mean everyone gets $60,000. No. The cases are settled in tiers depending upon the severity of the case and other metrics. It is hard to know what the inventory of other lawyers in these cases. Were many of them weak cases that pulled the average down? You would certainly hope so. Still, this is clearly less than I thought it would be. I predicted these cases would average $200,000. Let’s just say I missed it by a long shot.
What Injuries Were Caused by NuvaRing?
Women using NuvaRing are at a higher risk of:
- Strokes
- Heart Attacks
- Blood Clots
- Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) (blood clots in the legs)
- Pulmonary Embolism (blood clots in the lungs)
- Death
Deadline to File a NuvaRing Lawsuit
Every state has different rules about when a lawsuit is required. This is complicated by the fact that there are often choices about what state to file a lawsuit in. The most important thing is to talk to a lawyer soon to evaluate if you still have time before the trials start and a global deal gets done. In 2024, most viable Nuvaring lawsutis would be time barred.
Why Wasn’t There a NuvaRing Class Action?
Well, there is a “sort of” class action NuraRing lawsuit. What do we mean? Class action litigation and multdistrict litigation are often used to describe the same thing. In a class action, all of the claims are together and there is one trial that decides them. That would not work for this litigation because the injuries were so very different. There are wrongful death cases and other cases where the injuries were relatively insignificant.
So what is an MDL? An is a legal procedure used in the federal court system to efficiently manage complex cases that involve one or more common questions of fact and are filed across different districts. This process is employed when numerous lawsuits are filed against the same defendants regarding similar claims, such as in cases of defective products, mass torts, or widespread corporate misconduct. The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation decides whether cases should be consolidated into an MDL and selects a single district court to oversee pretrial proceedings, including discovery and motions.
The aim of an MDL is to streamline and expedite the handling of complex litigation, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, and conserve resources of the parties, their counsel, and the judiciary which is exactly how it worked for Nuvaring. After pretrial proceedings, individual cases may be sent back to their original courts for trial, if not resolved in the MDL.
So an MDL make sense for thei litigation. This birth control might have caused injury for one woman but not for another. So the cases were treated as individual cases in multi district litigation. This was actually good news for victims. You want your own case decided on the merits of the claim. But to save time and money for everyone involved, there are some things done – such as interrogatories and depositions of key witnesses – that are used for all of the pending claims.
How Much Are These Cases Worth?
Victims had one big question: if the lawsuits settle, how much money will I get? The settlement amount will likely depend on the severity of the injury caused. We predicted that the average settlement will be somewhere in the ballpark of $200,000. Many people said that was too low. But, actually, we shot high; it ended up being like $60,000.
More Information
- Get the full history of what happened in the NuvaRing litigation
- What is the difference between an MDL and a class action lawsuit?