Thousands of patients have filed injury lawsuits against Covidien and C.R. Bard over serious complications from defective hernia mesh implants. Many of these individuals face debilitating chronic pain, infections, and require additional, high-risk surgeries to repair the damage caused by this medical device.
Our firm represents patients in these cases and has developed a deep understanding of the medical and legal issues involved. As a boutique Southern California law firm focusing on complex product liability, we are uniquely positioned to handle the most serious hernia mesh injury cases, particularly those other firms may have turned away.
While Ethicon, Atrium, and other manufacturers have settled their hernia mesh lawsuits, Covidien has not. Only Covidien and certain severe injury Bard cases will remain active into 2026. Our practice is currently focused on accepting cases involving Covidien’s polyester-based mesh products and select Bard cases where complications have required at least one revision surgery.
Current Status of the Covidien Hernia Mesh MDL (No. 3029)
Last Updated: September 2025
Covidien Cases in Active Litigation
Lawsuits involving Covidien’s Parietex polyester mesh products continue in federal and state courts. As of mid-2025, over 2,000 lawsuits against Covidien are consolidated in federal multidistrict litigation (MDL No. 3029) in Massachusetts. Over 6,000 additional cases are filed in Massachusetts state court, with 500 more in Minnesota state court, where Medtronic (Covidien’s parent company) is headquartered.
The MDL, overseen by Judge Patti B. Saris, has progressed through discovery, with nearly 2 million documents produced and dozens of Covidien witnesses deposed. In April 2025, Judge Saris ordered Covidien to disclose its marketing and promotional spending, noting that this could reveal the motive and reasoning behind alleged safety misrepresentations.
Key Upcoming Dates:
- Mediation deadline: Extended to January 14, 2026 as settlement talks continue. Multiple mediation sessions were held in Spring and Summer 2025, though no global settlement has been announced.
- Fact discovery deadline: October 17, 2025 (for select bellwether cases).
- First Bellwether Trial: Patterson v. Covidien (involving Symbotex mesh) is scheduled to begin on February 17, 2026, with a pretrial conference on February 4, 2026.
- Second Bellwether Trial: Regina Stephen v. Covidien (involving Symbotex mesh) is scheduled for July 13, 2026, with a pretrial conference on June 25, 2026.
- Third Bellwether Pool: Michael Wardell v. Covidien and Maria Baisden v. Covidien (Parietex Composite mesh). One case will be selected for trial.
These bellwether trials will test legal arguments and evidence before a jury, which will critically shape future settlement discussions.
Common Complications Requiring Revision Surgery
Patients with defective hernia mesh often report painful and life-altering complications. These problems can emerge months or even years after surgery, making it difficult for patients and doctors to connect the symptoms to the implant. The failure of these devices frequently necessitates complex and invasive revision surgeries to remove the mesh and repair internal damage.
Our firm focuses on cases where patients have experienced severe complications such as:
- Chronic Pain and Foreign Body Sensation: Patients can experience persistent, debilitating pain in the abdomen, groin, or leg. This is often described as a constant pulling, burning, stiffness, or the sensation of a hard, foreign object inside the body. This can occur when the mesh shrinks, hardens, and pulls on sensitive nerves and tissues.
- Adhesions, Bowel Obstruction, and Perforation: The mesh material can incite a severe inflammatory response, causing dense scar tissue (adhesions) to form. These adhesions can bind the mesh to the intestines or other internal organs. This can lead to a life-threatening bowel obstruction or cause the mesh to erode through the intestinal wall, resulting in a perforation.
- Mesh Migration and Failure: Defective mesh can shrink, unravel, or break apart inside the body. Fragments of the mesh can then migrate from the original implant site, potentially damaging other organs or tissues. This structural failure often leads to a recurrence of the original hernia, defeating the purpose of the surgery.
- Recurring and Chronic Infections: The porous nature of hernia mesh, particularly degrading polyester, can harbor bacteria and lead to chronic infections that do not respond to antibiotics. In severe cases, this can lead to sepsis, abscess formation, or the need for emergency surgery to remove the infected device.
- Nerve Damage and Testicular Complications: In inguinal hernia repairs, mesh can entrap or damage nerves in the groin, causing chronic pain or numbness. In men, mesh has been shown to migrate into the spermatic cord, sometimes requiring surgical removal of a testicle (orchiectomy) to resolve the complications.
The delayed onset of these problems can be challenging. A severe infection or bowel obstruction may require emergency surgery. If mesh has eroded deeply into an organ, removal becomes a highly complex procedure, sometimes requiring surgeons to remove a portion of the intestine along with the mesh.
If you have experienced these serious complications and required revision surgery, contact our attorneys for a free case evaluation.
Covidien Parietex Mesh Design Defects
Covidien introduced Parietex surgical mesh for ventral hernia repair in 1999. The company chose polyester fabric instead of polypropylene, used in most other hernia meshes. Parietex received FDA clearance through the 510(k) process, meaning Covidien avoided human clinical trials before marketing the product by claiming it was “substantially equivalent” to an existing device. Patients later reported severe complications, with lawsuits alleging Covidien failed to warn surgeons and patients about known risks.
The polyester-based design of Parietex is problematic. Unlike polypropylene, polyester is not chemically inert in the body. It can shrink significantly after implantation, and its fibers can unravel. These polyester fibers may stiffen and harden, turning the mesh rigid. The material also weakens and degrades more quickly than expected, potentially leading to tearing or loss of structural integrity, which can result in hernia repair failure.
Plaintiffs allege polyester mesh causes greater degradation, higher rates of chronic infection, excessive shrinkage, and premature breakdown of protective collagen barriers. Covidien’s Parietex products feature anti-adhesion coatings, but these reportedly fail to function as intended. The collagen barrier absorbs too quickly, exposing the underlying polyester mesh, which can cause adhesions to internal organs.
Covidien Recalls and Regulatory History
Covidien recalled 7,333 units of Parietex Composite Parastomal Mesh in October 2018 due to manufacturing issues. The company recalled 129 units of Hydrophilic Anatomical Mesh in January 2021 for mislabeling. In February 2023, the FDA recalled Covidien’s Parietex Composite Mesh Polyester with Absorbable Collagen Film, Horseshoe-Shaped (model PCO2H3). Plaintiffs’ attorneys argue that these limited recalls show Covidien’s reluctance to acknowledge broader design issues with the polyester material itself.
Covidien Parietex Products at Issue
Covidien hernia mesh products named in litigation include:
- Parietex Composite (PCO) Mesh
- Parietex Composite Mono PM Mesh
- Parietex Composite PCO-OS (Open Skirt) Mesh
- Parietex Composite PCO-OB Mesh
- Parietex Composite Ventral Patch
- Parietex Composite Parastomal Mesh
- Parietex Optimized Composite Mesh
- Parietex Optimized Open Skirt Mesh
- Parietex ProGrip Self-Fixating Mesh
- Parietex ProGrip Laparoscopic
- Parietex Lightweight Monofilament Mesh
- Parietex Monofilament Polyester Mesh
- Parietex Plug and Patch System
- Symbotex Composite Mesh (subject of the first bellwether trials)
- Parietene DS Composite Mesh (polypropylene)
- Parietene Polypropylene Mesh
- Parietene ProGrip Mesh
- Surgi Pro and SurgiPro Plug & Patch
- Dextile Anatomical Mesh
Bard Hernia Mesh Design Defects
Bard’s hernia mesh products use medical-grade polypropylene, a plastic that can degrade inside the human body. The mesh may shrink, harden, and become brittle after implantation. The shrinking mesh may buckle, fold, or warp out of its intended shape. The Bard 3DMax mesh, pre-shaped for the groin, may lose its shape and fold over after implantation. This folding causes the mesh to ball up or migrate, requiring removal surgery.
Bard marketed design innovations that created new failure modes. Bard’s meshes had rough, cut edges that could fray. Bard developed products with sealed or stitched outer rims to create a smooth edge. These stitched rims reportedly detach or unravel, leaving sharp, frayed edges that can cause injury inside patients.
In inguinal hernia repairs, cases have shown mesh migration into the spermatic cords of men, entangling critical groin structures. Surgical removal has sometimes resulted in testicular removal (orchiectomy). The Composix Kugel Patch had a memory recoil ring prone to breaking; Bard’s Kugel mesh was recalled in 2005 after patients suffered bowel perforations from broken ring pieces.
Polypropylene mesh can also induce chronic inflammation and scar tissue, leading to the mesh becoming embedded in organs. This can lead to organ damage, fistula formation, or infection.
Bard Settlement
Bard faced over 30,000 hernia mesh lawsuits in federal court. Several bellwether trials tested plaintiffs’ claims. In 2022, a jury found Bard’s Ventralex mesh defectively designed and awarded $255,000 in damages. In another 2022 trial, a Rhode Island jury awarded a $4.8 million verdict in a case involving Ventralex mesh.
Evidence at trial showed a former Bard Vice President wrote disturbing emails regarding polypropylene sourcing:
- Most of Bard’s raw polypropylene was sourced from Chevron Phillips, who prohibited their raw polypropylene from being used in products that would be “permanently implanted in humans.”
- Because Chevron Phillips would stop sales if it knew the material was being implanted in people, the VP wrote: “It is likely they [Chevron Phillips] do not know of our implant application. Please do not mention Davol’s name in any discussion with these manufacturers.”
Facing more trials, Bard’s parent company announced a settlement of 38,000-40,000 claims in October 2024, accompanied by a financial charge of $1.7 billion.
The Bard litigation has entered a complex phase of resolution. As of August 2025, over 24,000 cases remain active. New lawsuits continued to be filed after the settlement announcement, with over 400 new plaintiffs joining in April 2025. The court established a Qualified Settlement Fund (QSF) in January 2025. The settlement uses a tiered payment structure:
- Quick-Pay 1: For those without qualifying injuries
- Quick-Pay 2: For mild to moderate injuries
- Traditional Pay: For the most severe injuries
Special Masters Ellen K. Reisman and John Jackson oversee an Intensive Settlement Process (ISP) for remaining claims, expected to run through 2029.
Bard Products at Issue
Bard hernia mesh products named in litigation include:
- Bard 3DMax and 3DMax Light Mesh
- Bard Ventralex Hernia Patch
- Bard Ventralex ST
- Bard Composix Kugel Mesh and Hernia Patch
- Bard Composix E/X Mesh
- Bard Composix L/P Mesh
- Bard PerFix and PerFix Light Plug
- Bard SepraMesh IP Composite Mesh
- Bard Modified Kugel Patch
- Bard Soft Mesh
- Bard Dulex Mesh
- Bard Ventrio ST
- Bard Ventralight ST
- Bard CK Parastomal Hernia Patch
- Bard CruraSoft Patch
Your Right to Compensation for a Defective Hernia Mesh
If you required revision surgery due to complications from Covidien Parietex or Bard hernia mesh, you may be entitled to compensation. Many patients have discovered that defective mesh products caused their pain, infections, or other serious health issues. These are not routine surgical outcomes. Covidien and Bard failed to adequately warn doctors and patients about known risks, including shrinkage, degradation, migration, and erosion.
These cases involve claims of defective design, manufacturing flaws, and failure to warn, and the law provides a path to hold these companies accountable. Compensation in a successful lawsuit can cover medical expenses for revision surgeries, lost wages from time unable to work, and the significant pain and suffering caused by the defective device.
Qualifying for a Hernia Mesh Claim
The hernia mesh litigation involves tens of thousands of claims nationwide. As a boutique firm dedicated to providing hands-on, sophisticated representation, we believe our clients are best served when we focus our resources on the most complex and serious injury cases. We have found that we can provide the greatest value to clients who have been turned away by other firms because their medical situations are too complicated.
To provide the focused, resource-intensive representation these cases demand, our practice concentrates on matters where complications have necessitated one or more revision or removal surgeries.
This focus allows us to dedicate the full weight of our product liability experience to clients who have suffered the most severe consequences of a defective mesh implant. If your experience meets these criteria, we invite you to schedule a confidential consultation to discuss your legal options.
Why Clients Choose Doyle APC
- 27+ Years of Product Liability Experience: Our practice focuses on holding manufacturers accountable for defective products, ranging from consumer goods and pharmaceuticals to medical implants, such as hernia mesh.
- Boutique Representation, Deep Involvement: We are not a volume-based practice. We personally evaluate and litigate every case we accept. When we take on a matter, it’s because we believe in the client and are fully committed to achieving the best possible result.
- Proven Track Record in Complex Cases: Our attorneys have led major class actions and complex litigation across the country, including high-stakes cases against prominent companies such as Apple, Honda, and Amazon, as well as leading device manufacturers. We’ve secured hundreds of millions of dollars for clients injured by defective products.
- Sophisticated Litigation with a Human Touch: We combine advanced technology and trial-ready preparation with attentive, personal service. Clients work directly with the attorneys handling their case.
- Contingency Representation: You pay nothing unless we recover compensation for you.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between the Covidien and Bard hernia mesh lawsuits?
The primary difference lies in the materials and litigation status. Covidien lawsuits focus on their Parietex line of products, which are made from polyester. These cases are in active litigation, with key bellwether trials scheduled for 2026. Bard lawsuits primarily involve polypropylene-based mesh products. While some Bard cases are still being filed, the majority of claims are now part of a large-scale settlement process announced in late 2024. Our firm is primarily focused on the active Covidien litigation.
I don’t know which type of mesh I have. Can you still help?
Yes. This is a very common situation. Most patients are not told the specific brand or model of the mesh used in their surgery. If you decide to retain our firm, we can obtain your medical records to identify the exact product involved. All we need to get started is information about the date of your surgery and the hospital or surgical center where it was performed.
What is the statute of limitations for filing a hernia mesh claim in California?
In California, the statute of limitations for a product liability claim is generally two years from when the injury was discovered or reasonably should have been discovered. This discovery rule is critical in hernia mesh cases, as complications can arise many years after the initial surgery. Because these deadlines can be complex, it is essential to speak with an attorney as soon as you suspect your health problems may be linked to your mesh implant.
What does “bellwether trial” mean and why is it important for my case?
A bellwether trial is a test case chosen from a large group of similar lawsuits, such as those in an MDL. The outcomes of these initial trials, whether verdicts for the plaintiff or the defendant, are used to help both sides gauge the strengths and weaknesses of their arguments before a jury. The results heavily influence settlement negotiations for the thousands of remaining cases. The upcoming Covidien bellwether trials in 2026 are therefore critical events for everyone with a claim against the company.
Another law firm turned down my case. Why would you be different?
Many large, national law firms that handle mass torts operate on a volume-based model. They may decline or drop cases that require more intensive investigation or have complex medical facts. As a boutique product liability firm, we specialize in exactly these types of cases. We deliberately take on a smaller number of clients so that we can provide the in-depth analysis and personal attention that medically complex cases require and deserve.
What are the potential settlement amounts for a serious hernia mesh case?
It is impossible to predict a specific settlement amount, as each case is unique. Compensation depends on factors like the severity of the injuries, the cost of medical treatment (including revision surgeries), the amount of lost wages, and the long-term impact on the patient’s quality of life. The Bard settlement utilizes a tiered system, with the highest payments reserved for the most severe injuries. Our goal in every case is to document the full extent of our client’s damages to pursue the maximum possible compensation.
How much does it cost to hire your firm?
We represent all clients on a contingency fee basis. This means you pay no upfront costs or out-of-pocket fees. Our firm advances all costs of litigation. We only receive a fee if we successfully recover compensation for you, either through a settlement or a jury verdict. If there is no recovery, you owe us nothing.
Free Legal Consultation
If you have experienced complications from Covidien Parietex or Bard hernia mesh and required revision surgery, we encourage you to contact our office for a complimentary case evaluation. Our attorneys will review your medical history, work to identify the specific mesh product involved, and determine whether your injuries may be related to a defective device.
This initial consultation is provided at no cost and with no obligation. As a boutique firm, we carefully evaluate each case to ensure we can provide the focused attention and resources necessary to achieve the best possible outcome for our clients. If your case qualifies, we will explain your legal options and guide you through the next steps.
Time is of the essence, as state filing deadlines vary and can be as short as one year from when your injury was discovered. To schedule your free, confidential consultation with one of our attorneys, contact us today. Getting started takes just minutes, and there is no obligation to proceed.
GET A FREE LEGAL CONSULTATION