Bard PowerPort

What the lawsuit is about

The Bard PowerPort lawsuit — also written "power port" and searched as the port catheter lawsuit — alleges that implanted port catheter devices caused complications such as catheter fracture, migration, infection, thrombosis, embolization, or removal surgery, and that warnings were inadequate. Federal cases are coordinated in MDL-3081 before Senior Judge David G. Campbell in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. Defendants dispute the allegations.

As of September 1, 2026, the JPML reported 3,734 pending actions in MDL-3081. This guide explains status, evidence, deadlines, and common claim-review issues in plain English.

Bard PowerPort Lawsuit update: September 2026

Active MDL and bellwether case management. The September 2026 JPML report lists MDL-3081 as active before Senior Judge David G. Campbell in Arizona. The latest order on the public court page reviewed, CMO 46 filed March 20, 2026, addressed Cook trial preparation, Miller pool selection and Divelbliss expert issues. Those historical settings do not establish that a trial occurred; later outcomes were not verified in the public orders reviewed.

The JPML, September 1, 2026 lists 3,734 pending actions and 3,980 total historical actions. The figures are docket counts, not settlement eligibility or payment counts.

Settlement status: The Arizona public MDL orders reviewed on September 14, 2026 did not identify a global settlement program. The posted order collection reviewed ends with CMO 46 in March 2026, so it cannot establish the absence of later private resolutions.

What changed this month?

• JPML reports 3,734 pending actions and 3,980 historical actions in MDL-3081. Source
• The pending count is unchanged from 3,734 on August 3, 2026. Source
• CMO 46 addressed Cook trial preparation, Miller pool selection and Divelbliss expert briefing. Subsequent outcomes are not verified here. Source

Case Status Snapshot

• Status: Active / Investigating
• Primary injuries: Fracture, migration, infection, thrombosis, embolization, and removal complications
• MDL: MDL-3081, District of Arizona
• Pending actions: 3,734 as of September 1, 2026
• Settlement status: No global public settlement announced
• Deadline: Varies by state and by the timing of implant, complication, discovery, and removal

Who may qualify for a Bard PowerPort lawsuit?

There is no automatic qualification rule. A claim review may consider whether a Bard implanted port catheter device was used, whether records identify the device, what complication occurred, when symptoms began, and whether the person required treatment, revision, or removal.

Commonly reviewed complications may include catheter fracture, device migration, infection, blood clots, embolization, vascular injury, or surgery to remove or replace the device. Medical proof matters because symptoms alone usually do not identify the device or establish causation.

What proof may help a Bard PowerPort claim?

Useful records may include implant records, device stickers, hospital supply records, operative reports, imaging studies, emergency records, infection records, clotting records, and removal or revision surgery reports. A reviewer may also ask for the name of the implanting facility and the treating doctors.

If the port has been removed, pathology, explant, or device-retention information may matter. If the port remains implanted, imaging and current treatment records may help document the alleged problem.

Bard PowerPort lawsuit deadline considerations

Deadlines vary by state and may turn on implant date, complication date, when the person learned the device may be involved, and whether the claim is a personal injury, survival, or wrongful-death matter. Device cases can be complicated because an implant may remain in place for years before a complication is identified.

Anyone researching a possible claim should gather implant date, complication date, removal date if any, diagnosis or imaging dates, and any communications about device failure or suspected causation.

Sources and status notes

• MDL count: Pending-action counts come from the JPML Pending MDL Dockets report dated September 1, 2026.
• Litigation status: This guide summarizes public information and should not be treated as a live docket report or legal advice.
• Review note: Device identification and medical records are especially important in implanted-port claims.

Where can I track the Bard PowerPort lawsuit?

Use the mass tort settlement tracker to compare public settlement posture, the deadline tracker for filing-window and key-date notes , and the MDL statistics tracker for federal case counts and court assignments.

What injuries does the Bard PowerPort lawsuit involve?

• Catheter fracture
• Device migration
• Infection
• Thrombosis
• Embolization
• Surgical removal or revision

How has the Bard PowerPort lawsuit progressed?

What is the Bard PowerPort settlement status?

No global public settlement has been announced for MDL-3081. Case review depends on device identification, medical records, injury type, timing, causation proof, and state law. Defendants dispute the allegations.

State-by-state guide links