Suboxone Lawsuit 2026: Tooth Decay Settlement and Payout Updates

July 2, 2026 – Plaintiffs’ Leadership Reappointed as Bellwether Work Continues

The court has reappointed plaintiffs’ leadership in the Suboxone MDL, keeping the current leadership structure in place as the litigation moves through Core Discovery Pool work and toward bellwether trial selection.

This is not a flashy update, but it is useful. Leadership continuity helps in an MDL like this because the case is now deep into records collection, discovery protocols, provider depositions, and bellwether planning. Changing leadership midstream would only add friction.

The bigger point is that the Suboxone litigation is still moving, just slowly. The first trial is not expected until 2028, but the court is now forcing the parties to do the work that will determine which cases get tested and how strong the evidence looks when individual plaintiffs are put under a microscope.

April 2, 2026 – Slow Path to Trial

Judge Calabrese has finally put real dates on the bellwether roadmap in the Suboxone tooth decay MDL, which is good news because this litigation now has an actual structure and a trial path. But there is no way around the frustrating part: the first bellwether trial is still not expected until March 2028, which is much later than we wanted.

Under the amended bellwether protocol, the court will work from the existing 100-case group to build a 50-case Core Discovery Pool, starting with 20 random selections on June 10, 2026, followed by 15 picks from each side on June 24, with the final Core Discovery list due to the court by July 2, 2026. Core discovery depositions will then run from July 13, 2026, through January 15, 2027. From there, the court will further narrow the case pool to a 15-case Trial Pool on January 29, 2027, complete case-specific fact discovery by June 4, 2027, and select the four final bellwether trial cases on June 11, 2027. After expert work, Rule 702 motions, and summary judgment briefing, the first trial setting is projected for March 2028. So yes, there is finally a real schedule, and that matters. But it is also a reminder that this MDL is moving on a much longer timeline than plaintiffs had hoped

February 11, 2026 – Confidentiality Issue

Plaintiffs had challenged confidentiality designations on 1,455 documents. After negotiations, the dispute was narrowed to 276 documents, divided into two categories: 25 “Category A” documents and 251 “Category B” documents. Defendants submitted all 25 Category A documents and a sample from Category B for the Court’s in camera review, and the issue was argued at a January 21, 2026, status conference.

Judge Calabrese applied the MDL’s protective order standard because none of the documents are currently being used in connection with motions or court filings. Under Case Management Order No. 5, material may be designated confidential if it includes research, financial, regulatory, marketing, manufacturing, commercial, or similar information that the producing party maintains as confidential. The producing party bears the burden and must act in good faith when making such designations.

After reviewing the documents, the Court ruled that all 276 documents are properly designated as confidential at this stage.

Is this a big deal? No.

February 10, 2026 – 100 Plaintiffs Picked to Be Possible First Trial.

Judge Calabrese has issued an order today randomly selecting 100 plaintiffs in the Suboxone Film MDL for potential inclusion in the Core Discovery Pool. These cases were drawn from files where defendants have indicated that records collection is substantially complete. The selection is procedural and part of the framework set out in Case Management Order No. 15, not a determination about the strength or weakness of any individual claim. Your lawyer will tell you if you made the list.

The selected plaintiffs must submit their Plaintiff Fact Sheets and supporting materials by April 20, 2026, with Defendant Fact Sheets due May 20, 2026. This stage moves those cases into deeper, case-specific discovery, allowing both sides to closely examine prescribing history, dental injuries, causation evidence, and damages. Fact sheets at this stage function like sworn discovery responses and will shape how these cases are evaluated going forward.

January 6, 2026 – Almost 2,000 Total Cases

The Suboxone tooth decay MDL has seen modest movement. As of January 2026, there are 1,854 pending cases, for a total of 1,907 cases.

December 9, 2025 – 33 New Cases in November

Thirty-three new cases were added to the Suboxone tooth decay MDL in November, bringing the total to 1,871.

October 1, 2025 – Judge Cracks Down on Record Delays

Judge Calabrese warned that he will force third-party providers to hand over critical medical and dental records for specific plaintiffs. If these providers do not comply by the end of the month, motions for contempt under Rule 45 are now on the table.

At the same time, several plaintiffs who failed to follow prior court orders (notably Case Management Order No. 15) have had their claims dismissed with prejudice, meaning they cannot be refiled. While losing a claim is never ideal, many plaintiff firms seem relieved that the judge is enforcing deadlines, as it moves the ball toward a Suboxone settlement.

September 7, 2025 – Pharmacies Called Into Court; MDL Gains Steam

Judge Calabrese has ordered a group of pharmacies to appear on September 25 to explain why they have not produced prescription records that plaintiffs believe are essential. These records are part of the “Records Collection Pool”—a group of ~500 cases that are being readied for deeper discovery and eventual bellwether trial consideration.

The broader MDL (MDL No. 3092) remains centralized in Ohio, and plaintiffs’ lawyers report that nearly 11,000 Suboxone dental lawsuits have now been filed nationwide.

August 25, 2025 – Bellwether Process Moving Forward

Judge Calabrese has started the next phase of the bellwether trial process, selecting an initial pool of 200 plaintiffs for record collection and discovery. These plaintiffs must produce proof-of-use and dental injury documentation by September 30. Lawyers believe that cases from this group will be used to identify bellwether trial candidates in early 2026. This is what we need to push the ball towards settlement… trial dates. While no trial dates have been set yet, the court is signaling that it wants to test these claims sooner rather than later (or, even better, create the pressure on both parties for a Suboxone settlement).

May 2, 2025: MDL Case Count Update

The Suboxone tooth decay litigation now includes 896 pending cases, up from 884 last month. While the month-to-month increase may seem small, the numbers no longer tell the full story. Lawyers can now file Suboxone cases in batches of 100, which means future filings will come in waves. Expect a sharp spike in June, when mass complaints with 100 plaintiffs each are expected to hit the docket.

April 1, 2025: No New Cases Filed, But Bulk Suboxone Lawsuits Are on the Way

For the second consecutive month, no new Suboxone dental injury lawsuits were added to the MDL, keeping the total steady at 896. This flat count is not a sign of declining activity—just a brief reset. Following Judge Calabrese’s order which authorized mass filings of up to 100 plaintiffs per case, plaintiff attorneys have paused to restructure their filing strategy. Expect a flood of grouped lawsuits to be filed in the very near future.

March 5, 2025: MDL Growth Stalls

The influx of new Suboxone tooth decay lawsuits into the MDL has completely halted. No new cases were added in February, marking the first month with zero new cases since the MDL began. The total number of pending cases remains at 896.

February 6, 2025: Suboxone Lawsuits Accelerate

Suboxone-related tooth decay claims are gaining momentum, as 142 new cases were filed in January. This increase brings the total number of lawsuits in the MDL to 896. Meanwhile, our firm continues to get a steady flow of new calls from potential claimants. Some people are only now connecting their dental injuries to Suboxone use.

January 19, 2025

As we talked about in our last update, there was a in-person status conference for MDL last week. Key actions included confirming the updated spreadsheet as the operative list of Schedule A claimants and resolving a discovery dispute about confidentiality designations in prior deposition testimony. The Court provided guidance for future discovery disputes and directed counsel to:

1. Agree on a standardized process for medical record collection and a bellwether process, with submissions due by February 5, 2025.
2. Address search terms and custodians, with Indivior’s counsel required to respond to the PLC by January 23, 2025, and further discussions with Aquestive Therapeutics to occur before the next conference.

The next status conference is scheduled for February 12, 2025, at 1:00 p.m., with the agenda due by February 7, 2025.

January 12, 2025: Status Conference on Tuesday

The Suboxone MDL in the Northern District of Ohio, overseen by Judge J. Philip Calabrese, continues to progress at a good clip, which, if you are hoping for a global Suboxone settlement, is good news.

There is a case-management conference scheduled for January 14, 2025. The joint agenda outlines critical topics, including updates on the census protocol, such as the status of dual representation, which is a continued problem as plaintiffs continue to inexplicably hire more than one lawyer.

Also on the table is plaintiffs’ efforts to provide proof of injury and product identification, and the completion of census forms. The parties will further address non-diverse tolling alternatives leading up to the (theoretical) June 2025 statute of limitations deadlines and the status of medical-records orders. Other items include resolving confidentiality challenges and negotiating expedited processes for discovery disputes.

Yet there is more. There is a lot going on right now. Additionally, the agenda prioritizes deadlines for developing key protocols, including production protocols for corporate documents, search terms, and custodians. The parties aim to finalize the framework for bellwether trials, including the selection and discovery of bellwether trial candidates, deposition protocols, and a comprehensive timeline for discovery, expert depositions, Daubert motions, and trial dates.

January 7, 2025: 38 New Cases Added to MDL

In November, the Suboxone MDL saw 38 new cases, up significantly from October’s 4 cases but still below earlier monthly volumes. The total number of pending cases now stands at 716. Again, with the tolling agreement, the number of filed Suboxone lawsuits is not really an important marker in the litigation.

January 3, 2025: Court Rules on Motion to Dismiss

In a key ruling for victims of Suboxone-related injuries, the MDL judge offered a decision that, while mixed, is ultimately promising for plaintiffs seeking justice. Though it applies directly to just one case, the reasoning is likely to impact many others in this litigation.

The plaintiff, like so many others, endured devastating dental injuries allegedly linked to Suboxone’s acidic formulation. The court upheld the plaintiff’s pre-approval design defect claim, agreeing that manufacturers had a duty to explore safer alternatives—such as Sublocade, an injectable buprenorphine option that came to market later.

The plaintiff identified Sublocade, an injectable form of buprenorphine approved in 2017, as a feasible alternative design that might have mitigated the risks.

The judge also greenlit the failure-to-warn claim, emphasizing that Suboxone’s label failed to address the risk of dental injuries until 2022, leaving both patients and doctors in the dark about the potential harm.

The court importantly allowed failure-to-warn claims to proceed for actions after a June 2022 FDA label change. Plaintiffs allege that manufacturers could have strengthened warnings earlier under FDA regulations, especially as new evidence about dental risks associated with Suboxone emerged. This ruling has real statute of limitations implications for plaintiffs, so arguably the deadline to file may not have started for anyone. (We will explain this in a later update after some legal research.)

While the dismissal of post-approval design change claims and the narrowing of failure-to-warn liability to Indivior, the label-holder, were disappointing, the ruling serves as a strong reminder: drug manufacturers like Indivior must be held accountable for evolving safety risks.

December 8, 2024: Product Hop

To understand this litigation, you have to follow the money. In 2006, Suboxone’s manufacturers developed a dissolvable film version to maintain their market monopoly and block competition from generic tablets. While the film contains the same active ingredients as the tablets and works similarly in the body, it was designed in a way that pharmacists could not substitute it for generic tablet versions. This strategy, called a “product hop,” allowed the company to delay the introduction of cheaper generics, keeping their profits high.

To get FDA approval for the film, the manufacturers reused safety data from their Suboxone tablets, but they failed to properly analyze or update the data for dental injuries, such as erosion and decay, that could result from the film’s use. This negligence left patients unaware of the significant risks to their teeth.

This “profits over people” argument could sound to many like plaintiffs’ lawyers propaganda. We get that. But this history bears repeating. In 2016, 41 states and Washington, D.C., sued Indivior for antitrust violations, accusing the company of unfairly preventing competition in the opioid-dependence treatment market. The lawsuit settled in 2023, with Indivior agreeing to pay $102.5 million.

In 2019, a federal grand jury indicted Indivior for a nationwide scheme to boost Suboxone film prescriptions, alleging misuse of its “Here to Help” program to connect patients with doctors who overprescribed Suboxone and other opioids. The indictment also claimed Indivior discontinued Suboxone tablets to delay generic alternatives.

Reckitt Benckiser, Indivior’s parent company, resolved related charges by forfeiting $647 million in proceeds, paying $700 million in civil settlements, and $50 million to the FTC—totaling $1.4 billion in penalties. This was, by they way, more than double the amount Purdue Pharma paid in 2007 for similar marketing claims related to OxyContin.

November 7, 2024: Lack of Medical Insurance for Dental Injuries

In most mass torts, the medical costs are covered by health insurance. But this is more the exception than the rule in the Suboxone victims. Many victims face enormous costs of dental repair, which often include root canals, implants, and bone grafts due to the extent of damage. Many victims calling our attorneys say they face out-of-pocket expenses well over $20,000.

November 5, 2024: New Census Order in MDL

The latest order in the Suboxone MDL requires all plaintiffs with cases filed by October 7, 2024, to submit key information, authorizations, and records via a system called Rubris Crosslink. This order outlines steps for plaintiffs to establish and verify their use of brand-name Suboxone Film and the dental injuries linked to its use. Here’s what this means for current plaintiffs and, eventually, anyone signing up for the litigation:

Required Documentation and Census Form

To continue in this MDL, each plaintiff must:

1. Complete a Census Form that captures critical case details.
2. Submit Medical, Dental, and Pharmacy/MAT Authorizations for release of related health records.
3. Provide Proof showing use of brand-name Suboxone Film and documentation of dental injury.

Timeline and Key Actions

• Crosslink Account Setup: Plaintiffs or their counsel must create a secure Crosslink account within the Rubris system, which will host and manage the submitted information confidentially.
• Dual Representation Check: So many victims have, inexplicably, hired multiple law firms. If multiple law firms represent a plaintiff, they have 21 days to determine which firm will continue representation for that individual.
• Indication for Removal from Schedule A: Plaintiffs can also choose to be removed from Schedule A if they lack proof or decide not to proceed. The court allows 30 days for this decision, and removals can continue as the case progresses.

Plaintiffs must complete all submissions within 270 days of the order (approximately by September 2025). Failure to meet deadlines or correct any noted deficiencies may lead to dismissal, with prejudice, meaning those claims cannot be refiled.

Costs for maintaining the Crosslink system are shared between plaintiffs and defendants. The Census submission incurs a $17 fee per plaintiff, and certain administrative charges apply for any plaintiffs requesting removal from Schedule A.

In short, this order sets a rigorous protocol to ensure each case in the Suboxone MDL is supported by detailed documentation, which will play a crucial role in progressing claims toward potential resolution. Our Suboxone lawyers welcome this development. We need to know how many viable claims are in this litigation before we can have any hopes of reaching a global settlement.

October 25, 2024: Severity of Injury Will Drive Suboxone Settlement Amounts

If this litigation is successful as we expect, settlement compensation will hinge heavily on the severity and impact of each plaintiff’s dental injuries. It is hard to know what kind of cases other Suboxone lawyers are taking. For cases involving cavities, you should not expect a lot. Our lawyers are not taking those cases.

But for plaintiffs suffering severe structural damage—root fractures, tooth loss, or extensive enamel erosion—compensation will escalate significantly. These cases require costly and invasive interventions, like crowns or implants, and bear a more lasting toll on daily life.

For plaintiffs whose injuries result in disfigurement, impaired function, or even bone loss, settlements should increase substantially, mirroring the depth and permanence of their suffering. Such cases are akin to hidden sinkholes: what begins as a manageable issue can deepen into a life-altering condition, reshaping everything from physical appearance to self-esteem. Here, compensation must account for emotional distress and reduced quality of life.

October 15, 2024: Why a Warning Really Matters for Suboxone

One key argument in the Suboxone lawsuits is that, with proper warnings, many patients might have chosen different treatments. Suboxone, a combination of buprenorphine and naloxone, isn’t the only option for opioid addiction. Methadone, a full opioid agonist, provides stability through tightly regulated clinics, while Vivitrol offers a non-opioid, monthly injection for those avoiding maintenance medications. Each treatment has unique risks and benefits, and patients should have had the chance to weigh these alternatives based on their needs and lifestyle.

Instead, Suboxone was promoted as the gold standard—without adequate warnings about severe withdrawal or dental damage. Plaintiffs argue that the lack of transparency robbed them of real choice, like picking a locked door in a hallway full of options. If they had known what was behind the Suboxone door, many would have opted for a different path to recovery. Which is why, these lawsuits argue, the warning was not given—the fear of lost profits.

September 25, 2024: Why Most of the Best Suboxone Lawsuits Will Have Pre-2018 Usage

The Suboxone lawsuits primarily target the brand-name version of the drug used before June 2018, when Indivior, the company behind its design, testing, and production, controlled the market.

What changed? After June 2018, generic versions of Suboxone became widely available and quickly dominated market share. No one wanted to keep paying Indivior’s ridiculous pricing that had made it a fortune. Yet the ongoing lawsuits focus on brand-name Suboxone, alleging that its defective design led to serious dental issues, including tooth decay, erosion, and even tooth loss.

But why not sue the generic manufacturers? While technically possible, it’s a legal uphill battle. This stems from a Supreme Court ruling that protects generic drug makers from liability for failure-to-warn claims—the cornerstone of these lawsuits. According to FDA regulations, generic manufacturers must mirror the brand-name drug’s label, warnings and all, without deviation. Even if they become aware of new risks, they are legally prohibited from adding or changing the warnings.

Because of this, courts have repeatedly found that generic manufacturers can’t be held liable for failing to provide additional warnings. In the case of Suboxone, this means plaintiffs are largely confined to suing Indivior, the original manufacturer, even if they were harmed by the generic version.

The irony, of course, is patients who only took generic Suboxone are left to bear the brunt of a system that shields the follower regardless of its inaction. The law should point its finger at the original architect and the copyist that does not lift a finger to notify the FDA or the original manufacturer of the problem. But it does not.

September 7, 2024: Suboxone Status Conference

There was a Suboxone status conference on Wednesday. This litigation is starting to move along. This what came out of it:

Pending Motions to Dismiss

For lawsuits that are being voluntarily dismissed, the judge believes at this stage the best path is dismissal without prejudice, which means you have the option of refiling the lawsuit.

Discovery from Prior Litigation

Defendants are finalizing their review of deposition transcripts from prior antitrust and patent litigation, with plans to amend their discovery response by September 30, 2024. The relevance of most expert reports from prior litigation is being assessed, and further follow-up with counsel is expected.

Status of Discovery

A unified deadline of September 18, 2024, was set for defendants to provide a list of custodial and non-custodial sources of electronically stored information. Discovery prioritization was given to Indivior over Aquestive. Plaintiffs are to provide information on individuals listed on Schedule A, including records of dental injury and product identification, by September 30, 2024. If you are a plaintiff on Schedule A, make sure you cooperate with your lawyer to get these records to the defendants.

Bellwether Protocol

Agreement was reached that all claimants must complete a census form. A draft census form, highlighting any disputes, is due by September 30, 2024. The Court plans to finalize the census form at the October status conference and discuss the scope of additional information needed from claimants for bellwether selection.

Next Status Conference

Scheduled for October 4, 2024, with continuation into October 5th.

September 2, 2024: Suboxone Lawsuits Filed in State Court

There are few Suboxone tooth decay lawsuits filed in state court because there are not many jurisdictions where the defendants can be sued in state court. A Suboxone case can be removed from state court to federal court under diversity jurisdiction if the parties are from different states (complete diversity) and the amount in controversy is more than $75,000. There are states where the defendants reside where there is clear state court jurisdiction – notably Virginia, Delaware, Ohio and New Jersey – but there is not diversity in most states.

Indivior recently removed a case that was filed by a Nevada man who is claiming dental injuries from the drug. His Suboxone lawyers for some reason filed the lawsuit in Clark County in Nevada but it will end up with the other cases in the MDL.

July 31, 2024: Motion to Dismiss Filed By Defendants

The defendants in the Suboxone litigation have filed a motion to dismiss all lawsuits against them, citing the doctrine of federal preemption. This defense is often used in product liability cases involving prescription drugs. The core of the argument is that plaintiffs cannot sue manufacturers under state law for failure to warn when federal FDA regulations govern the content of warning labels for these drugs. However, this argument rarely succeeds in such cases, and we don’t anticipate a different outcome here.

July 23, 2024: Defendants In Process Of Producing Critical Documents

Getting all the relevant documents from the Suboxone defendants – most notably, Indivior, will be critical to this litigation. The defendant say they are in the process of producing the IND and NDA for Suboxone film and tablets. Regarding antitrust and patent litigation, they will serve amended discovery responses by early next week and continue to supplement their document production.

The parties disagree on the discoverability of documents related to the buprenorphine drug Sublocade and its potential as an alternative design for Suboxone film. It would be really helpful if they discussed tooth decay so Suboxone lawyers really want these documents. The judge will revisit this issue at the next status conference.

July 3, 2024: Lawyers Discuss Converting Filing In Federal Court

Suboxone lawyers are discussing converting filing in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction into a formal tolling agreement, which would pause the statute of limitations. They’ve had positive discussions and are hopeful about reaching an agreement. They need more time to finalize this and will provide an update by August 1, 2024.

The attorneys have already reached a tolling agreement for non-diverse plaintiffs in state court, which pauses the statute of limitations until June 16, 2025. Plaintiffs’ counsel has shared the names and details of these plaintiffs as part of the agreement.

Why is Indivior willing to agree now after all of it effort to take a tolling deal? There is already a de facto order in place from the court. See the May 17 update below.

July 1, 2024: Jurisdiction May Matter in this Litigation

From a statute of limitations standpoint, these states – and Florida and Michigan – are the best states right now for a Suboxone claim because they have a longer deadline to file:

June 11, 2024: Merck & Co. Only Revised Canadian Warning In March 2023

It was not until March 2023 that Merck & Co. revised its Canadian warnings to include reports of “dental caries” among Suboxone users, leading to cavities, decay, filling loss, and sometimes total tooth loss.

For context, the FDA issued a bulletin in January 2022 highlighting the severe dental risks associated with buprenorphine-containing medicines. Yet it took Merck over a year to revise its Canadian warnings.

June 5, 2024: Hearing On General Causation Bifurcation Argument Expected Tomorrow

Tomorrow is the hearing on the general causation bifurcation argument before the MDL judge we talked about in the April 17, 2024 update below. Plaintiffs argue that the Court should deny Indivior request to bifurcate general and case-specific discovery because it presupposes Indivior will prevail on future motions. As the plaintiffs’ response does a great job of explaining, this is unbelievably unlikely given the existing scientific evidence linking Suboxone film to dental erosion. The scientific evidence demonstrates that Suboxone film’s high acidity causes dental erosion, and xerostomia (dry mouth), a known side effect of buprenorphine, reduces saliva that would naturally neutralize acid, leaving teeth more vulnerable to damage. This evidence allows plaintiffs to prove general causation, making bifurcated discovery unnecessary.

This is a big deal because bifurcating discovery into general and case-specific phases would cause significant delays and increased costs. It would probably tack on a year to the Suboxone timeline. Victims want their settlement money yesterday. So we need to win this motion and get this show on the road.

The judge could rule from the bench tomorrow, but that is unlikely.

May 30, 2024: Texas Resident Files New Suboxone Lawsuit

A resident of Jasper, Texas has filed a new lawsuit alleging that the Suboxone film caused him severe dental erosion and decay due to its acidic formulation. The plaintiff asserts that the defendants, including Indivior and other related entities, failed to adequately warn or inform patients and healthcare providers of the significant dental risks. The plaintiff now suffers permanent dental damage and seeks compensatory and punitive damages, claiming the defendants’ negligence and failure to provide proper warnings and instructions regarding the use of Suboxone film.

May 17, 2024: Some Resolution On Tolling Issue

We have some resolution on the tolling issue. By June 14, 2024, the plaintiffs’ lawyers file a complaint on the master MDL docket, listing individual plaintiffs on an attached schedule with specified details. This will alleviate the need for plaintiffs listed to file their own individual lawsuits.

Defendants may file a motion to sever by July 1, 2024. I’m not totally sure how that would work. If severed, plaintiffs will file separate actions continuing from the original MDL suit and promptly amend their complaints, ensuring they relate back to the original filing date.

April 18, 2024: New Suboxone Lawsuit Filed By New York Plaintiff

A new Suboxone lawsuit filed last week involves a Westchester County, New York, plaintiff who has experienced significant dental damage, attributed to the use of prescription Suboxone film. Initially prescribed the medication for opioid addiction, the plaintiff was not warned of the potential for serious dental erosion and decay. Despite adhering to medical advice, the plaintiff now faces permanent tooth damage and has undergone extensive dental work to address the harm caused by the medication. The lawsuit seeks compensation for the injuries and damages incurred as a result of using Suboxone film.

April 17, 2024: Indivior Pushes For Prioritization Of General Causation

Indivior advocates for a discovery phase that prioritizes general causation due to its pivotal role in the litigation’s outcome.

Indivior’s legal team asserts that if general causation cannot be reliably established through scientific evidence, it would render other aspects of the cases unnecessary and inefficient. This strategic approach is designed to conserve resources by averting extensive discovery and litigation efforts that could potentially be futile if general causation is not proven.

Indivior is right that general causation must be proved, or the rest of the case is moot. Are there other personal injury MDLs where this is also true? Yes, every single one.

Indivior draws upon past legal precedents in which courts have ordered discovery to commence with general causation, citing this method as a way to streamline the process and avoid unnecessary legal expenses. Specifically, they cite four cases where this was kinda, sorta the path out of zillions of MDLs over the years.

One huge distinction between the Suboxone lawsuits and those isolated cases is that the manufacturer already has put a warning on the product and has not sought to have it removed.

The update to the Suboxone warning label to include tooth decay is indicative of general causation in the litigation concerning its link to dental injuries. This change in labeling is an acknowledgment by the manufacturer and regulatory authorities of a plausible link between Suboxone use and dental issues, based on observed data and reported cases.

It is a big deal that the warning on this product ultimately changed. A warning label change significantly impacts the arguments surrounding general causation. It is evidence that the manufacturer was aware of potential harms caused by their product, which clearly suggests that there is a scientifically reasonable basis for believing that the product can cause the injury claimed. The label change implies that there have been enough reports or findings to warrant caution to users about specific health risks, in this case, dental injuries.

What a delay would do for Indivior is give them a chance to delay the litigation. After we prove general causation, we would be nowhere on getting individual lawsuits ready for trial. Endless delays frustrate plaintiffs and would push them into being willing to accept lower Suboxone settlement amounts.

Adopting a dual-track discovery approach for both specific and general causation simultaneously can significantly enhance litigation efficiency by ensuring that individual claims are processed concurrently with broader causation issues. This method prevents the stalling of personal adjudications and alleviates the undue burden on plaintiffs, who otherwise might face prolonged delays and increased financial and emotional strain. Such a plan allows for a more dynamic allocation of resources, potentially minimizing redundancy and ensuring that all aspects of each case receive timely and appropriate attention. By addressing individual specifics alongside general causation, the court can streamline proceedings, reduce bottlenecks, and facilitate a quicker resolution.

March 19, 2024: Judge Calabrese Establishes Protocol For Direct Filing And Service Of Process

In Case Management Order No. 3, Judge Calabrese establishes protocols for the direct filing and service of process. Defendants have agreed to waive formal service of summons for cases in this MDL, except for Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare (UK) Ltd., which has agreed to abate the issue of service waiver. Defendants are required to establish an email address to accept service of complaints, facilitating an expedited process. However, this does not apply to Reckitt Benckiser, who clearly wants to be difficult. So traditional service methods may still be required.

Importantly, the order allows for the direct filing of Suboxone lawsuits. Direct filing in an MDL allows plaintiffs to file their lawsuits directly into the centralized proceeding, bypassing the initial filing in their local jurisdiction and the subsequent transfer process.

The order also confirms that directly filing an action does not determine the applicable choice of law and does not require the application of Ohio’s choice of law rules. Instead, the choice of law will be determined as if the case were originally filed in the designated “Original Venue” and then transferred to the MDL. Upon completion of pretrial proceedings, cases will be presumptively transferred back to their original venues for trial, unless otherwise objected to or agreed upon by the parties.

March 11, 2024: New Video On Suboxone Lawsuit

We put up a pretty new and pretty comprehensive Suboxone lawsuit video today that explains where we are in the litigation and talks about expected settlement amounts.

March 8, 2024: First Suboxone Status Conference Held

Yesterday, the first Suboxone status conference was held. There is not much to report, but we should shortly have the ability to direct file in the MDL and hopefully graduate to a short-form complaint, which will make filing claims much easier.

Lawyers’ impression of the hearing is that Judge Calabrese will be eager to move this litigation forward. That is good news for everyone.

March 5, 2024: Federal Judge Approves $385 Million Settlement

A federal judge in the US District Court of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has approved a $385 million settlement between a group of direct purchasers and Indivior Inc., the maker of Suboxone, an opioid addiction treatment.

This is not a tooth decay class action lawsuit alleging personal injuries. This is an entirely different Suboxone lawsuit. The settlement resolves claims that Indivior abused its monopoly over Suboxone. The lawsuit initiated nearly a decade ago centered on Indivior’s decision to switch Suboxone from a tablet to a sublingual film in 2010, with plaintiffs alleging anticompetitive motives. Indivior had previously settled with 42 states’ attorneys general for approximately $102.5 million and with a plaintiff class of end-payors for $30 million.

March 4, 2024: New Suboxone Lawsuit Filled On Behalf Of Pennsylvania Woman

A new Suboxone lawsuit was filed Friday on behalf of a Pennsylvania woman who was prescribed Suboxone film in 2016 to treat an opioid addiction that began after a wrist surgery nearly ten years before. She switched to Suboxone film in 2019. Her tooth decay symptoms began in 2020. Of course, neither she nor her doctors understood that her dental complications were from Suboxone because there was no warning on the product until 2022.

March 1, 2024: Currently 51 Pending Cases In MDL

The newly created Suboxone tooth decay class action MDL currently has a total of 51 pending cases. This is going to be a fast-growing MDL so look for this number to go up very quickly over the next few months.

February 19, 2024: New Suboxone Lawsuit Filed In Federal Court

A new Suboxone lawsuit was filed in federal court last week. A resident of Washington County, Pennsylvania, filed suit following severe dental damage attributed to the use of Suboxone film she used for opioid use disorder management.

As all of these suits do, this lawsuit emphasizes the absence of adequate warnings about the potential for dental erosion and decay associated with the medication, despite the FDA mandating a new warning label in June 2022 for all buprenorphine medications that dissolve in the mouth. This label change highlighted the risk of dental issues, a warning not deemed necessary for other buprenorphine formats like injectables or patches.

The complaint seeks various forms of relief, including compensatory and punitive damages, in response to the harm caused by the defendants’ actions and inactions related to the marketing and prescribing information of Suboxone film. Punitive damages will loom large in this litigation.

February 13, 2024: Case Management Order No. 1 Outlines Initial Steps

MDL No. 3092 is moving forward now. Case Management Order No. 1 for the Suboxone (Buprenorphine/Naloxone) Film Products Liability Litigation, as this litigation will be called, kicks off the litigation and outlines the initial steps for organizing and managing these consolidated lawsuits.

Nothing surprising in this order from Judge J. Philip Calabrese, Here are the key points summarized:

1. Initial Status Conference: Scheduled for March 7, 2024, at the Carl B. Stokes U.S. Courthouse in Cleveland, Ohio. This is a preliminary conference, and parties are not required to submit a Rule 26(f) Report beforehand.
2. Attendance Requirements:
   • Counsel for all parties do not need to attend in person, and groups with similar interests are encouraged to appoint a single attorney to represent them collectively at the conference.
   • Attendance via phone is allowed, but notice must be given to the Court’s MDL Clerk by March 4, 2024.
   • Counsel seeking leadership roles should be present in person, as those not in attendance won’t have the opportunity to speak at this conference.
3. Participation of Other Counsel: Attorneys representing clients not currently part of the litigation but who may be joined later are invited to attend or participate.
4. Pre-Conference Submissions:
   • By March 1, 2024, parties must submit a joint memorandum discussing various issues, including case categorization, anticipated case numbers and types, document repository creation, discovery protocols, and more.
5. Leadership Structure:
   • The court plans to appoint leadership counsel for plaintiffs, considering criteria such as cooperation, commitment, experience, and resources.
   • Applications for leadership positions are due by March 1, 2024.
6. Plaintiffs’ Separate Submission: Also by March 1, 2024, plaintiffs’ counsel must submit a memorandum detailing the proposed leadership structure, responsibilities, and the management of a common benefit fee and expense fund.
7. Stays on Pleadings and Discovery: Deadlines for defendants to respond to complaints and all current disclosures, discovery, and motions to dismiss are stayed until the status conference, where further directions will be discussed.
8. Application to Later-Filed Cases: This order applies to all cases later filed in, transferred to, or removed to this court as part of the MDL.
9. Admission of Counsel: Attorneys of record in transferred actions may continue to represent their clients without the need for a pro hac vice motion, but must maintain an electronic filing account. This is a blessing.

This order sets the procedural groundwork for managing the litigation, including initial conference logistics, leadership structure, and preliminary case management protocols.

February 4, 2024: Suboxone Lawsuit Gains New Momentum

The Suboxone lawsuit is gaining new momentum now that the MDL Panel is consolidating all Suboxone lawsuits in federal court to Ohio on Friday.

You will see more lawyers getting involved, and, more importantly, we are increasing our settlement payout estimates. The warning was changed for a reason—suboxone causes tooth decay. No one disagrees with this, an incredible luxury in proving any civil lawsuit.

January 30, 2024: New Study Suggests Pregnant Women Should Consider Suboxone Over Methadone

All along, we have told you we do not support a Suboxone recall. Instead, what our Suboxone lawyers are saying is that patients need to know the dental injury risks to make an informed choice and to engage in dental hygiene to control that risk.

The findings of a new study suggest that pregnant women are a group that should be talking to their doctor about possibly choosing Suboxone over methadone. Why? The study found that women seeking treatment for opioid addiction may face a higher risk of delivering a child with birth defects if they use methadone, compared to the use of Suboxone or other buprenorphine drugs.

January 26, 2024: JPML Panel Meets To Discuss Lawsuit Consolidation

Today, the JPML Panel met to discuss whether to consolidate the Suboxone lawsuits. Our lawyers believe the Panel will rule next month to consolidate these cases in a new Suboxone class action lawsuit.

January 23, 2024: Accepted States

In 2024, our lawyers are accepting new Suboxone lawsuits in these states (and now, in April 2024, Michigan). UPDATE: We now take claims in all 50 states for reasons explained above.

January 16, 2024: New Suboxone Lawsuit Filed By Pennsylvania Resident

A new Suboxone lawsuit was filed on Friday. The plaintiff, a resident and citizen of Pennsylvania, experienced dental damage directly caused by using the Suboxone film prescribed by the Defendants.

In 2013, a physician prescribed Suboxone film to Plaintiff for the treatment of opioid use disorder. Of course, neither Plaintiff nor Plaintiff’s physicians were informed of the significant risk of dental erosion and decay associated with Suboxone film. Plaintiff now suffers from permanent tooth damage and has undergone extensive dental procedures to address the damage caused by Suboxone film.

January 11, 2024: More Suboxone Lawsuits Expected In MDL By End Of Month

Our lawyers have not seen any new Suboxone lawsuits since the one filed by our legal team at the end of last year. More will be filed before the MDL hearing at the end of the month to show the MDL Panel that the volume of cases justifies a Suboxone class action lawsuit.

January 4, 2024: Suboxone Medication Guide Does Not Include Warnings Surrounding Tooth Decay

What is crazy is that the medication guide for Suboxone film does not include warnings about certain tooth decay risks as a potential side effect of this drug formulation. It is in the prescribing information, but Indivior apparently does not take it seriously enough – even with all of these Suboxone dental injury lawsuits – to put it in the medication guide. It is hard to understand what Indivior is thinking.

January 2, 2024: Thousands Of Suboxone Cases Under Active Investigation

As we head into the hearing later this month on forming a Suboxone class action MDL, there are at least 15 Suboxone tooth decay cases pending in 5 different federal districts nationwide. That may seem like a small number, but there are thousands more Suboxone cases under active investigation and soon to be filed by lawyers across the country.

December 13, 2023: Suboxone Defendants Agree With Motion To Create Class Action MDL

The defendants in the Suboxone tooth decay lawsuits recently filed a response to the request for class action MDL consolidation. In the response, the Suboxone defendants actually agreed with the motion to create a new Suboxone class action MDL. They request that the MDL be assigned to Judge Philip Calabrese in the Northern District of Ohio. The Suboxone MDL will likely be established next month.

December 7, 2023: New Video Provides Latest New In Efforts To Create Suboxone Class Action

We have a new video proving the latest news in the effort to create a Suboxone class action lawsuit and how an MDL will put real settlement pressure on Indivior. We also talk about the main reason our lawyers believe most victims bringing a Suboxone lawsuit will have a strong case.

November 27, 2023: Plaintiffs’ Petition To Consolidate All Federal Suboxone Lawsuits Into a Single MDL

Legal representatives for the plaintiffs have petitioned the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to consolidate all federal lawsuits related to Suboxone into a single multidistrict litigation (MDL).

So, this is the effort to form a class action lawsuit. Plaintiffs ask that every federal Suboxone lawsuit be transferred to a federal court in Ohio. What would this do? It would simplify and expedite pretrial processes and push Indivior to offer reasonable settlement amounts (down the road, anyway). Presently, these lawsuits are scattered across various federal districts. Forming an MDL class action lawsuit would provide a more efficient way to handle these cases, which all share similar foundational allegations.

November 3, 2023: 14 New Suboxone Lawsuits Filed In Federal Courts

In just the last two weeks, fourteen new Suboxone product liability lawsuits have been filed in federal courts against the manufacturer, Indivior. Eight of them were filed in the Northern District of Ohio, which has the most pending Suboxone cases of any district.

November 2, 2023: Ohio Man Files Suboxone Lawsuit

A man in Wood County, Ohio, filed a Suboxone lawsuit after suffering from dental injuries while using Suboxone film.

Like most of the victims who call our law firm, he developed an addiction to opioids. His doctor prescribed Suboxone to manage the addiction. As a result of the prescribed usage of Suboxone film, the plaintiff now alleges he suffers from permanent tooth damage.

His Suboxone tooth decay lawsuit seeks damages for the substantial dental procedures he has undergone and for the pain and suffering these injuries have caused him.

October 30, 2023: Suboxone Manufacturer To Fight Two-Front Litigation Battle

Indivior, the manufacturer of Suboxone, will be fighting a two-front litigation battle. While the number of tooth decay suboxone lawsuits continues to grow, Indivior will also defend a false claims act lawsuit accusing the company of an illegal kickback scheme. Last week, a federal judge rejected Indivior’s motion to dismiss that case and allowed it to proceed.

October 24, 2023: Indivior Agrees To $385 Million Settlement

The maker of Suboxone, Indivior, has now agreed to pay another $385 million to settle an antitrust lawsuit accusing the company of illegally suppressing generic competition.

The lawsuits claim that Indivior introduced the dissolving film tab version of Suboxone just as its patent on the original pill version was about to expire to block competition from generic Suboxone tablets. Indivior already paid $900 million to settle a similar lawsuit the states and the federal government brought.

October 16, 2023: Ohio Man Files Suboxone Lawsuit In Federal Court

A man from Geauga County, Ohio, became the latest plaintiff to file a Suboxone tooth decay lawsuit in federal court King v. Indivior, Inc, et al. 1:23-cv-01924 (N.D. Ohio).

According to the Complaint, the plaintiff became addicted to opioids after being prescribed them by his doctor. The plaintiff was eventually prescribed Suboxone to treat the addiction. After just 16 months on Suboxone, the plaintiff began to suffer severe tooth decay and eventually had to have several teeth extracted permanently.

The Complaint alleges that neither the plaintiff nor his doctor knew Suboxone caused tooth decay.