Bard PowerPort Lawsuit — June 2026 Updates
Last updated: June 2026
May 11, 2026 — DEFENSE VERDICT IN FIRST BELLWETHER
Bard Wins Cook v. Becton Dickinson: A jury returned a defense verdict in the first Bard PowerPort bellwether trial, which had been underway in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona since April 21, 2026. The case involved plaintiff Robert Cook of Minnesota, who alleged his PowerPort device became severely infected shortly after implantation while he was undergoing chemotherapy, requiring hospitalization and delaying his cancer treatment. The jury was reportedly unable to agree that the port catheter was defectively designed. The outcome is a setback for plaintiffs but does not end the broader litigation — bellwether verdicts are test cases intended to inform settlement negotiations, not bind other claimants. The first trial was an infection case; the remaining five bellwether trials cover fracture, thrombosis, and other injury types that plaintiffs' attorneys consider stronger on causation. The next trial is scheduled for July 7, 2026.
May 4, 2026
MDL Reaches 3,437 Cases: The total number of filed lawsuits in MDL #3081 reached 3,437 as of the first week of May 2026, continuing the steady pace of new filings that has characterized this litigation throughout 2025 and into 2026.
April 27, 2026
Key Internal Bard Document Admitted at Trial: Judge Campbell ruled that a Bard internal PowerPoint presentation would be admitted into evidence with partial redactions. The document covered infection rates, the feasibility of antimicrobial coatings, and the impact of device infections on cancer patients — directly relevant to the plaintiff's failure-to-warn and design defect claims. Bard sought to exclude the entire exhibit under Rule 403; the court agreed only to redact pages where Bard referred to itself as the market's "King," finding that specific language could inflame the jury without adding meaningful probative value. The remainder was admitted unchanged, which plaintiffs' attorneys characterized as a significant win during trial.
April 21, 2026
First Bellwether Trial Begins — Cook v. Becton Dickinson: Opening statements commenced in the first Bard PowerPort bellwether trial. Plaintiff attorneys told jurors that Bard had known for decades its devices were dangerously prone to infection and chose profit over patient safety. They presented evidence that Bard had developed safer technologies — including antimicrobial coatings and smoother catheter materials — as early as 2005, but repeatedly shelved them despite internal documents acknowledging the catheters' rough surface characteristics. By 2020, attorneys argued, more than 30 safer alternatives existed and Bard had acted on none of them.
January 15, 2026
Trial Date Confirmed: Judge David G. Campbell confirmed the Cook bellwether trial would begin April 21, 2026. Five additional trials are scheduled across 2026 and into early 2027 — covering a mix of infection, thrombosis, and catheter fracture cases across different catheter materials and device types.
December 9, 2025
MDL Surpasses 2,400 Cases: Over 336 new lawsuits were added in November alone — the highest single-month increase in the litigation's history at that time — bringing the total to 2,463 pending claims. The surge reflected continued growth in patient awareness and aggressive plaintiff attorney filing activity heading into trial.
August 20, 2025
Full Bellwether Schedule Set: Case Management Order No. 38 established six bellwether trials running from April through early 2027. Judge Campbell directed the selection to include a mix of infection, thrombosis, and fracture case types, as well as representation of different catheter materials and at least one surgical complication case.
June 26, 2025
Bard Ordered to Revise Expert Disclosures: Judge Campbell ordered Bard to revise Rule 26(a)(2)(C) summaries for 16 expert witnesses, finding Bard's original disclosures were too vague or simply referenced deposition transcripts without summarizing expected testimony. Revised summaries were due by July 18, 2025. Legal observers viewed the ruling as favorable to plaintiffs heading into trial preparation.
November 21, 2024
Successor Liability Agreement Reached: The parties reached an agreement treating all Bard entities as a single group for liability purposes. Becton, Dickinson agreed to satisfy any judgments or settlements if Bard entities cannot, while reserving the right to challenge specific liability arguments. In exchange, plaintiffs withdrew certain discovery requests and amended the master complaint to remove successor liability claims.
What Is the Bard PowerPort?
A Bard PowerPort is an implantable port catheter device surgically placed under the skin — typically in the chest wall — to provide long-term intravenous access. The device eliminates the need for repeated needle sticks by creating a permanent access point directly to the bloodstream, making it common in patients undergoing chemotherapy, long-term antibiotic therapy, dialysis, or parenteral nutrition.
The PowerPort is manufactured by C.R. Bard, Inc., which was acquired by Becton, Dickinson and Company (BD) in 2017. The device features a port reservoir connected to a catheter tube — and it is that catheter tubing, made from a proprietary polyurethane material called ChronoFlex, that has become the central focus of thousands of product liability lawsuits.
Plaintiffs allege that ChronoFlex is inherently defective and prone to material degradation over time — causing the catheter to fracture, crack, and shed fragments inside the body. When this occurs, catheter pieces can migrate through the bloodstream, reaching the heart, lungs, or other vital organs with potentially fatal consequences.
Alleged Defects & Reported Injuries
The core allegation in the Bard PowerPort litigation is that C.R. Bard designed and manufactured a catheter with a material it knew — or should have known — was susceptible to premature degradation. Internal documents admitted during the first bellwether trial showed Bard was aware of ChronoFlex degradation data and the feasibility of antimicrobial and smoother-surface alternatives going back to at least 2005.
Reported complications and injuries include:
Catheter fracture or breakage inside the body, releasing fragments into the bloodstream
Device migration — the port or catheter shifts from its implanted position
Serious infection or sepsis — bacterial contamination at or spreading from the port site
Thrombosis or blood clots in veins surrounding the catheter
Pulmonary embolism — fragments or clots blocking blood flow to the lungs
Vein or organ perforation from migrating catheter pieces
Cardiac complications including tamponade, arrhythmia, and cardiac puncture
Hemorrhage or hematoma — internal bleeding at or near the catheter site
Port erosion through skin — the port physically erodes through the skin surface
Necrosis — tissue death at the port implantation site
⚠️ Important: Many PowerPort complications appear more than 90 days after implantation — sometimes years later. If you received a port catheter device and later developed any of these symptoms, the connection to the device may not have been immediately obvious. Speak with your doctor and contact an attorney promptly, as filing deadlines apply.
Do You Qualify for the Bard PowerPort Lawsuit?
Cases across the MDL involve a range of device types and injuries. The most compelling claims generally involve:
✅ You May Qualify If:
- You received a Bard PowerPort, BardPort, PowerPort isp M.R.I., PowerPort Slim, or AngioDynamics port catheter device
- The implant occurred within the last 10 years
- You suffered catheter fracture, device migration, serious infection, sepsis, thrombosis, blood clots, or pulmonary embolism
- You required hospitalization, surgical removal, or corrective procedures due to device complications
- You experienced severe complications including sepsis, internal bleeding, organ perforation, or cardiac events
❌ You May Not Qualify If:
- You had a port device but experienced no complications or injuries
- Your device was implanted more than 10 years ago and your state's statute of limitations has expired
- You are already represented by another attorney in this matter
Free & Confidential Case Review
Were You Harmed by a Bard PowerPort?
Five bellwether trials remain scheduled through early 2027. Statutes of limitations vary by state and may affect your ability to file. Get your free evaluation today — no cost, no obligation.
GET A FREE CASE REVIEW →
Attorneys work on contingency — you pay nothing unless compensation is recovered.
MDL & Lawsuit Status
In mid-2023, existing Bard PowerPort lawsuits were consolidated into MDL #3081 — formally captioned In re: Bard Implanted Port Catheter Products Liability Litigation — in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona under Judge David G. Campbell. Additional cases are also pending in New Jersey state court and in Arizona state court.
The MDL process consolidates all pretrial discovery, expert witness proceedings, and case management motions before a single judge while preserving each individual plaintiff's right to their own case and their own individual compensation. After bellwether trials are complete, unresolved cases may be remanded to their home federal districts for individual trial.
As of May 2026, more than 3,437 claims are centralized in the MDL. Bard won the first bellwether trial in May 2026 — an infection case. The result is a setback but does not resolve the broader litigation. Fracture and thrombosis cases, which make up the majority of pending claims and are generally considered to have clearer causation, remain to be tried.
Bellwether trial schedule (MDL #3081):
| Trial Date |
Case / Case Type |
Status |
| April 21, 2026 |
Cook v. Becton Dickinson — Infection Case |
DEFENSE VERDICT |
| July 7, 2026 |
Trial #2 |
NEXT TRIAL |
| August 18, 2026 |
Trial #3 |
SCHEDULED |
| October 13, 2026 |
Trial #4 |
SCHEDULED |
| December 1, 2026 |
Trial #5 |
SCHEDULED |
| February 2, 2027 |
Trial #6 |
SCHEDULED |
No global settlement has been reached as of June 2026. The outcomes of the remaining bellwether trials are expected to be the primary driver of settlement negotiations across all pending claims.
Did Bard Know About the Risks?
A central theory in the PowerPort litigation is that C.R. Bard had early knowledge of the ChronoFlex catheter material's propensity to degrade and fracture — yet failed to meaningfully warn the public, healthcare providers, or patients.
During the first bellwether trial, plaintiffs introduced internal Bard documents showing the company had explored antimicrobial coatings and smoother catheter surfaces as early as 2005 — and repeatedly shelved those safer alternatives. An internal PowerPoint presentation covering infection rates and the feasibility of design improvements was admitted into evidence by Judge Campbell in April 2026, over Bard's objection.
Plaintiffs also allege Bard exploited the FDA's 510(k) premarket notification process — which allows certain medical devices to reach market without full clinical trials — and the Alternative Summary Reporting (ASR) program to report device failures quietly to the FDA without triggering public disclosure requirements. This allegedly kept patients and doctors in the dark about the true incidence of fracture and infection events.
In 2020, Becton, Dickinson issued a Class 2 recall of certain Bard PowerPort models, acknowledging the devices could cause adverse health effects — though framing them as temporary or reversible with medical intervention. Plaintiffs contend the recall was inadequate and long overdue.
Legal Claims Being Asserted
Plaintiffs in the Bard PowerPort MDL are asserting a broad range of product liability and tort claims, including:
- Defective design — the ChronoFlex material was inherently prone to degradation and fracture
- Defective manufacturing — individual device units deviated from intended design specifications
- Failure to warn — Bard failed to adequately disclose known risks to patients and physicians
- Negligence — Bard failed to exercise reasonable care in design, testing, and post-market surveillance
- Breach of warranty — express and implied warranties that the device was safe and fit for purpose
- Fraud and concealment — knowingly misrepresenting or concealing material safety information
- Punitive damages — for alleged willful disregard of patient safety in pursuit of profit
Potential Compensation
No Bard PowerPort settlements have been announced as of June 2026. Bard won the first bellwether trial in May 2026. While that outcome is a setback, it involved an infection claim — the remaining trials cover fracture and thrombosis injuries that attorneys believe present stronger causation arguments. Settlement negotiations are expected to develop as additional verdicts come in.
Depending on the severity of your injuries, potential compensation in a Bard PowerPort lawsuit may include:
- Past and future medical expenses — hospitalization, surgery, treatment, follow-up care
- Lost wages and loss of earning capacity
- Pain and suffering
- Loss of enjoyment of life
- Emotional distress
- Punitive damages — available when a manufacturer's conduct is found to be egregious or reckless
- Wrongful death damages — for surviving family members in fatal cases
Settlement values in mass tort MDLs typically vary significantly based on injury severity, the number of surgeries required, degree of permanent harm, and the outcome of bellwether verdicts. An attorney can evaluate your case at no cost and give you a realistic picture of what your claim may be worth.
Mass Tort MDL vs. Class Action: What's the Difference?
The Bard PowerPort litigation is a mass tort MDL — not a class action. This is an important distinction that directly affects your potential compensation:
Mass Tort MDL (This Case)
- You keep your own individual lawsuit
- Compensation is based on your specific injuries
- You maintain input and control over your case
- Higher payouts possible for severe injuries
Class Action
- All plaintiffs share one lawsuit
- Payout is split equally or by formula
- A lead plaintiff makes decisions for the group
- Individual payouts are typically much smaller
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Bard PowerPort and why is it being sued?
The Bard PowerPort is an implantable port catheter device used to deliver chemotherapy and IV medications without repeated needle sticks. Lawsuits allege its ChronoFlex polyurethane catheter material is defectively designed — prone to fracturing and degrading inside the body, releasing fragments that can cause life-threatening infections, blood clots, and embolisms. C.R. Bard is accused of knowing about these risks and failing to adequately warn patients and doctors.
Who qualifies to file a Bard PowerPort lawsuit?
You may qualify if you received a Bard PowerPort, BardPort, PowerPort isp M.R.I., PowerPort Slim, or AngioDynamics port catheter — typically within the last 10 years — and suffered serious complications such as catheter fracture, device migration, serious infection, thrombosis, blood clots, pulmonary embolism, or required surgery to remove or repair the device. Cases involving hospitalization, emergency surgery, or severe outcomes are considered especially strong.
Bard won the first trial — does that affect my case?
The first bellwether verdict was a defense win in an infection case. However, bellwether trials are test cases — they are used to gauge how juries respond to evidence and are intended to inform settlement negotiations, not bind other plaintiffs. The remaining five trials cover fracture and thrombosis injuries, which attorneys consider stronger on causation. The litigation continues, and attorneys are still accepting new cases.
How much is the Bard PowerPort lawsuit worth?
No global settlement has been reached as of June 2026. Bard won the first bellwether (an infection case) in May 2026. The remaining trials — covering fracture, thrombosis, and other injuries — are expected to shape settlement values going forward. Potential compensation includes medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and punitive damages. An attorney can evaluate your specific situation at no cost.
Is there a deadline to file a Bard PowerPort lawsuit?
Yes. Statutes of limitations vary by state but typically run 2 to 4 years from the date of injury or discovery that the injury was device-related. With trials actively underway and more scheduled through early 2027, acting promptly is important. A free case evaluation can determine whether you still qualify to file.
What is the difference between the Bard PowerPort MDL and a class action?
The Bard PowerPort litigation is a mass tort MDL — not a class action. In the MDL, every plaintiff retains their own individual lawsuit and receives compensation based on their specific injuries and circumstances. In a class action, all plaintiffs share one lawsuit and any payout is divided equally. The MDL structure means your award reflects the severity of your individual injuries — not an equal share of a common pool.
How do I know if my device was a Bard PowerPort?
Check your implant card, surgical discharge paperwork, or contact the hospital or oncologist where the device was placed. Common Bard PowerPort device names include: PowerPort, BardPort, PowerPort isp M.R.I., PowerPort Slim, and PowerPort M.R.I. AngioDynamics port devices are also included in active litigation. An attorney can help you obtain and review your medical records at no cost.
Does it cost anything to file a Bard PowerPort lawsuit?
No. InjuryClaims.com's case review service is completely free. Attorneys in this litigation work on a contingency fee basis — meaning you pay nothing unless compensation is recovered. There are no upfront costs, no fees to start, and no obligation to proceed after your free evaluation.
Time-Sensitive — Deadlines Apply
Five Trials Still Ahead — Don't Wait
Bard won the first bellwether in May 2026, but five trials covering fracture and thrombosis injuries remain scheduled through early 2027. Statutes of limitations are real and vary by state — the window to file may be closing.
SEE IF I QUALIFY — FREE
Related Lawsuits
