Spinal Cord Stimulator MDL
Multidistrict litigation, or MDL, is a federal court procedure that consolidates lawsuits involving common factual questions into a single court for coordinated pretrial proceedings. As of February 2026, plaintiffs have requested that all spinal cord stimulator lawsuits against Abbott and Boston Scientific be consolidated in the Northern District of Illinois under proposed MDL No. 3181. If you are considering filing a claim, understanding how the MDL process works can help you know what to expect.
What Is Multidistrict Litigation?
When many people are injured by the same product and file lawsuits in different federal courts across the country, the cases often involve overlapping questions of fact: Was the product defective? Did the manufacturer know about the risks? Did the company comply with federal regulations? Rather than have dozens of different judges answer these same questions independently — potentially reaching conflicting conclusions — federal law allows for consolidation.
Multidistrict litigation (MDL) is a procedural tool created by Congress in 1968 under 28 U.S.C. § 1407. It allows the federal court system to transfer civil lawsuits from multiple districts to a single court for coordinated pretrial proceedings. The cases are not merged into one lawsuit. Each plaintiff retains their individual claim with their own specific injuries, damages, and facts. But the pretrial work — discovery, expert witness disputes, motions to dismiss, and other preliminary matters — is handled once by a single judge rather than duplicated across multiple courts.
A federal procedural mechanism under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 that consolidates civil lawsuits from different federal districts into a single court for coordinated pretrial proceedings. Each case remains separate, but discovery, motions, and other pretrial work are handled centrally to prevent duplication and conflicting rulings. MDLs currently account for approximately 59 percent of the federal civil docket.
MDLs are common in product liability litigation involving medical devices and pharmaceuticals. According to the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, MDL proceedings currently account for approximately 59 percent of the entire federal civil caseload — an increase from 38 percent in 2019. Since the JPML's creation in 1968, more than 1.2 million cases have been consolidated through the MDL process.
MDL vs. Class Action: Key Differences
MDLs and class actions are frequently confused, but they are fundamentally different legal procedures. The distinction matters because it directly affects how your case is handled, what compensation you may receive, and how much control you retain over your claim.
Multidistrict Litigation (MDL)
- Individual Cases Each plaintiff retains a separate lawsuit with their own specific facts, injuries, and damages
- Individualized Compensation Settlement amounts are based on the severity and nature of each plaintiff's injuries
- Your Own Attorney Each plaintiff is represented by their own lawyer, with a steering committee coordinating shared pretrial work
- Bellwether Trials Representative cases are tried individually to help determine settlement values
Class Action Lawsuit
- Single Lawsuit One or more named plaintiffs sue on behalf of an entire class of similarly situated people
- Divided Settlement Settlement proceeds are typically divided equally among class members
- Class Counsel A small number of attorneys represent the entire class; individual class members do not have personal attorneys
- Single Outcome The result — whether settlement or verdict — applies uniformly to the entire class
Spinal cord stimulator lawsuits are being pursued as an MDL rather than a class action because each patient's injuries are different. One patient may have experienced lead migration and required a single revision surgery, while another may have suffered permanent nerve damage from electrical overstimulation. The MDL structure preserves each patient's ability to receive compensation based on the specific harm they suffered.
How the MDL Process Works
The MDL process follows a structured sequence from the initial consolidation request through pretrial proceedings, bellwether trials, and ultimately resolution — whether through settlement or individual trials. Here is how each stage works.
Motion to Transfer Filed with the JPML
Any party — typically a group of plaintiffs' attorneys — can file a motion with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) requesting consolidation. The motion must identify at least two pending lawsuits that share common questions of fact and propose a transferee court. The JPML is a panel of seven federal judges, each from a different circuit, appointed by the Chief Justice of the United States.
SCS MDL: Filed February 20, 2026JPML Hearing and Transfer Order
The JPML holds hearings every two months in different cities across the country. Both sides present oral arguments. If the panel determines that consolidation will promote efficiency and convenience, it issues a transfer order designating a single federal district court and assigning a transferee judge. Cases filed later that involve the same issues are transferred as "tag-along" actions.
SCS MDL: Hearing not yet scheduledAppointment of Leadership and Steering Committees
The transferee judge appoints a Plaintiffs' Steering Committee (PSC), a group of attorneys selected to coordinate the plaintiffs' side of the litigation. The PSC manages shared discovery, retains common experts, and negotiates on behalf of all plaintiffs during pretrial proceedings. Individual plaintiffs retain their own attorneys, but the PSC handles the work that benefits everyone.
Discovery and Pretrial Proceedings
This is the longest and most intensive phase. Both sides exchange evidence, take depositions of witnesses and company executives, retain and depose expert witnesses, and file pretrial motions. The transferee judge issues case management orders setting deadlines for each phase. In a medical device MDL, discovery typically involves millions of pages of internal company documents, FDA correspondence, clinical data, and manufacturing records.
Plaintiff Fact Sheets
Each individual plaintiff completes a detailed questionnaire — called a Plaintiff Fact Sheet (PFS) — that documents their specific device information, implantation date, injuries, medical history, treating physicians, and damages. This information is used to categorize cases by severity and select representative cases for bellwether trials.
Bellwether Trial Selection and Trial
Both sides nominate cases for bellwether trials — representative test cases that go to trial before the broader group. The judge selects a final set of cases that represent the range of injuries and circumstances in the MDL. The outcomes of these trials provide critical data points: they reveal how juries evaluate the evidence, what damages they award, and where each side's arguments are strongest or weakest.
Settlement Negotiations or Remand
Bellwether trial results typically drive settlement discussions. If plaintiffs win significant verdicts, defendants may prefer to negotiate a global settlement rather than face hundreds or thousands of individual trials. If defendants prevail, plaintiffs may need to reassess their claims. Cases that do not settle are remanded — sent back to the original courts where they were filed — for individual trials.
Don't Wait for the MDL to Be Finalized
Attorneys are accepting spinal cord stimulator cases now. Filing early means your case will be among the first processed when the MDL is established, and statutes of limitations continue to run regardless of MDL status.
Get a Free Case ReviewThe Spinal Cord Stimulator MDL
On February 20, 2026, a group of plaintiffs represented by Davis & Crump, P.C. and other law firms filed a motion with the JPML requesting that all federal spinal cord stimulator lawsuits be consolidated into a single MDL. The motion identified 15 pending lawsuits across five federal districts and proposed the Northern District of Illinois as the transferee court.
Where the Cases Are Pending
The 15 lawsuits identified in the transfer motion are pending in five federal courts: five cases in the Central District of California, five in the Northern District of Illinois, and individual cases in the Northern District of Mississippi, the Southern District of Mississippi, and the Western District of Michigan. At least one case in the Western District of Michigan already has a fully briefed preemption motion awaiting a ruling — one of the key reasons plaintiffs argue consolidation is necessary, to prevent conflicting decisions on this central legal issue.
Why Northern District of Illinois Was Proposed
The plaintiffs' motion proposes the Northern District of Illinois as the transferee court. The Northern District of Illinois already has five pending SCS cases, is a major federal court with experience handling complex MDL proceedings, and is geographically accessible as a centralized location. The JPML considers factors including the convenience of the parties and witnesses, the location of relevant evidence, and the experience of the potential transferee judge when selecting the MDL court.
Why the Preemption Issue Drives Consolidation
A central argument in the transfer motion is the need for consistent rulings on federal preemption. Both Abbott and Boston Scientific have asserted that because their spinal cord stimulators received FDA Premarket Approval as Class III medical devices, state law product liability claims are preempted by federal law under the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in Riegel v. Medtronic. Plaintiffs counter with "parallel claims" — arguing that the manufacturers violated federal requirements, not just state law — and with separate Administrative Procedure Act claims against the FDA itself.
If different courts reach different conclusions on whether these claims survive preemption, the litigation could produce inconsistent results for similarly situated plaintiffs. Consolidating the cases ensures a single judge resolves this threshold question uniformly.
Bellwether Trials and How They Drive Settlements
Bellwether trials are the most consequential phase of an MDL for individual plaintiffs, because their outcomes typically determine whether and at what level the broader group of cases will settle.
The word "bellwether" refers to a lead sheep that wears a bell so the rest of the flock can follow. In an MDL, bellwether cases serve a similar function: they are the first cases to go through a complete trial, and their results provide a signal — to both sides — about how the remaining cases are likely to play out.
How Bellwether Selection Works
Both the plaintiffs' steering committee and the defendants nominate a pool of cases. The transferee judge then selects a final group — typically four to eight cases — that represent the range of injuries, devices, manufacturers, and circumstances in the MDL. These cases proceed through individual discovery, expert reports, and trial preparation before being tried to a jury.
Bellwether outcomes affect the entire MDL in several ways. If plaintiffs win strong verdicts with substantial damages, the defendants face the prospect of hundreds or thousands of additional trials with similar results — creating powerful financial incentive to negotiate a global settlement. If defendants prevail in early bellwether trials, plaintiffs may need to reassess the value of their remaining claims or refine their litigation strategy before proceeding.
In large medical device MDLs, bellwether trials have historically been the mechanism that drives resolution. The vast majority of MDL cases settle rather than go to individual trial, and the bellwether results are typically the catalyst for those settlement discussions.
What the MDL Means for Your Individual Case
If you are considering filing a spinal cord stimulator lawsuit, the MDL process has several practical implications for your case.
Your Case Remains Yours
An MDL does not merge your case with anyone else's. Your specific injuries, medical history, device information, and damages are unique to your claim. While pretrial proceedings are consolidated, any eventual compensation you receive would be based on the individual facts of your case, not divided equally among all plaintiffs.
You Keep Your Own Attorney
Unlike a class action where a small group of attorneys represents the entire class, in an MDL each plaintiff retains their own lawyer. Your attorney files your case, manages your Plaintiff Fact Sheet, keeps you informed about MDL developments, and represents your individual interests. The Plaintiffs' Steering Committee handles shared work that benefits all plaintiffs, but does not replace your personal legal representation.
Filing Now Still Matters
The creation of an MDL does not pause or extend statutes of limitations. Each state has its own deadline for filing personal injury claims, typically one to three years from the date the injury was discovered or should have been discovered. If you wait too long to file, you may lose the right to pursue a claim entirely — regardless of whether an MDL exists. Filing early also ensures your case is among the first to be processed and categorized once the MDL is established.
Contingency Fee Representation
Spinal cord stimulator lawsuits are handled on a contingency fee basis. There is no upfront cost to file. Attorney fees are paid only if compensation is recovered through a settlement or verdict.
Free Spinal Cord Stimulator Case Review
Statutes of limitations are running. If you experienced complications from an Abbott or Boston Scientific SCS device, contact an attorney today to protect your right to file a claim.
Request a Free ReviewExpected Timeline
The timeline for any MDL is difficult to predict with precision, as it depends on the complexity of discovery, the number of cases filed, and how the parties and the court manage the proceedings. Based on the current status of the spinal cord stimulator litigation and the typical pace of medical device MDLs, the following is a general estimate.
MDL Transfer Motion Filed
Plaintiffs file motion with the JPML to consolidate 15 federal SCS lawsuits in the Northern District of Illinois.
JPML Hearing and Transfer Order
The JPML holds a hearing and issues a decision on consolidation. If granted, cases are transferred and a transferee judge is assigned.
Leadership Appointed, Discovery Begins
The transferee judge appoints a Plaintiffs' Steering Committee. Case management orders are issued, and coordinated discovery begins.
Discovery, Expert Reports, Pretrial Motions
The most intensive phase. Document production, depositions, expert witness retention and depositions, Daubert challenges, and pretrial motions including the critical preemption ruling.
Bellwether Trial Selection and Trials
Both sides nominate bellwether cases. The court selects representative cases for trial. Bellwether trials proceed, and results inform settlement discussions.
Settlement Negotiations or Individual Trials
Depending on bellwether outcomes, parties may negotiate a global settlement program or individual cases are remanded for trial in their original courts.
Important
These timeframes are estimates based on typical MDL progression in medical device litigation. The actual timeline may be shorter or longer depending on the complexity of discovery, the number of cases filed, court scheduling, and how settlement discussions proceed. Some medical device MDLs have resolved within 3–4 years; others have taken significantly longer.
Frequently Asked Questions
MDL 3181 is the proposed case number for the spinal cord stimulator multidistrict litigation. On February 20, 2026, plaintiffs filed a motion with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation requesting that all federal SCS lawsuits against Abbott and Boston Scientific be consolidated in the Northern District of Illinois for coordinated pretrial proceedings. As of February 2026, the JPML has not yet scheduled a hearing on the motion.
No. In fact, waiting can be risky. Statutes of limitations continue to run regardless of whether an MDL has been created, and each state has its own filing deadline. Filing now protects your legal rights and ensures your case is among the first processed when the MDL is established. If you file in any federal court, your case will be transferred to the MDL court once consolidation is ordered.
Most likely not. In an MDL, the vast majority of pretrial work is handled by attorneys and does not require individual plaintiffs to appear in court. You may need to complete a Plaintiff Fact Sheet and provide medical records, which your attorney will assist with. If your case is selected as a bellwether, you may need to attend trial proceedings. But the overwhelming majority of MDL plaintiffs never personally appear in the transferee court.
Medical device MDLs typically take three to five years from consolidation to initial bellwether trials, with settlement discussions often following shortly after. Some MDLs resolve faster; others take longer depending on the complexity of the issues and the volume of cases. The SCS MDL is in its earliest stage — the transfer motion was just filed in February 2026 — so the complete timeline will depend on how the litigation develops.
No. An MDL consolidates individual lawsuits for pretrial efficiency, but each case remains separate. In a class action, one lawsuit is filed on behalf of an entire group, and the outcome applies to everyone in the class equally. In the SCS MDL, each plaintiff's injuries, device information, and damages are evaluated individually, and any compensation is based on the specific facts of each case.
Speak with An Attorney
Submit This Form or Call 800-403-6191