Direct2Attorney is a legal marketing & referral service - not a law firm and not a substitute for legal advice.

Bard PowerPort Lawsuit Explained: MDL 3081, Bellwether Results, and the Barium Sulfate TheoryThe Week After a Car Accident: What Nobody Warns You About

Bard PowerPort claims are consolidated as MDL 3081 in the District of Arizona before Judge David Campbell. As of the August 2026 court report, 3,734 cases were pending, with several hundred added each month. Two bellwether trials have been completed and three more are scheduled through February 2027. The device and the theory The PowerPort…

PUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 16, 2026 UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2026 4 MIN READ
Family supporting a man with visible skin irritation while Dupixent injection pens sit on a table, symbolizing concerns about long-term side effects and FDA safety monitoring.

On this page

Social Share

Bard PowerPort claims are consolidated as MDL 3081 in the District of Arizona before Judge David Campbell. As of the August 2026 court report, 3,734 cases were pending, with several hundred added each month. Two bellwether trials have been completed and three more are scheduled through February 2027.

The device and the theory

The PowerPort is a totally implantable access port: a reservoir under the skin connected to a catheter that ends in a central vein. It is rated for high-pressure injection of contrast dye, which is where “Power” comes from. The catheter tubing is polyurethane mixed with barium sulfate so it shows on X-ray.


Plaintiffs allege that the barium sulfate concentration used in Bard’s catheters causes the tubing surface to degrade and pit over time. That degradation, they say, has two consequences: the tube weakens and can fracture, sometimes sending fragments into the heart or lungs, and the roughened surface gives bacteria a place to colonize, driving bloodstream infections. Bard disputes the theory and points to the device’s regulatory clearance and clinical history.

What the bellwethers have decided

01

Cook (April–May 2026), an infection case. The jury found for Bard on failure-to-warn and consumer-fraud claims but deadlocked on design defect. Jurors reportedly believed the device could have been made safer. A new-trial motion is pending.

02

Divelbliss (August–September 2026), a fracture case. $40 million in compensatory damages, with findings of design defect and failure to warn. No punitive damages. The first plaintiff verdict in the MDL.

03

Lattanzio (October 13, 2026) and beyond. Trials are set for October 13, December 1, and February 2, 2027. Each tests a different injury type, building the range of outcomes both sides use to negotiate.

The split between the two verdicts is instructive: juries have so far found fracture cases more persuasive than infection cases. That distinction is likely to shape how any settlement is tiered.

Direct2Attorney · Litigation Explainer

Injury types in the litigation


Mechanical failures

Strongest verdict so far
  • Catheter fracture
  • Fragment migration to heart or pulmonary artery
  • Perforation of vessels or heart tissue
  • Emergency retrieval surgery

Biological complications

Tried once, deadlocked
  • Bloodstream infection and sepsis
  • Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism
  • Endocarditis
  • Device removal and replacement

What an MDL means for an individual claimant

Each patient keeps an individual lawsuit. The court coordinates discovery and rulings that apply to every case, tries a handful of representative cases, and — typically — the parties use those results to negotiate a settlement program with tiers based on injury severity. Cases not resolved that way can be returned to their home courts for trial. There is no global settlement as of September 2026, and firms are actively accepting new claims.

What this means if you're considering a claim

The threshold facts are straightforward: a Bard port device, a qualifying injury with medical documentation, and a filing deadline that has not run in your state. A free review checks all three and connects you with a participating firm working within the MDL.

Think your injury fits?

Free, confidential review. No obligation

Get a free case review

Common Questions

Is this a class action?

No. It is an MDL. Each case is individual, and compensation depends on your specific injury.

Which devices are included?

Bard PowerPort models and related Bard implantable ports and catheters. Some claims involve similar Bard products under other names; a firm can confirm from your records.

Has Bard settled any cases?

No global settlement has been announced. Bellwether verdicts are the primary driver of any future program.

Do I need to live in Arizona?

No. Cases from any state are transferred into the MDL for pretrial proceedings.

Does the case review cost anything?

No. Direct2Attorney’s review is free, and participating law firms typically work on contingency, meaning fees are generally paid only if there is a recovery. Confirm fee terms in writing with the firm.


Related Reading

— Free case review

Protect your health and your rights

No upfront costs. Speak with our team about whether your situation may qualify for review by a participating law firm.

Contacting Direct2Attorney does not create an attorney-client relationship and does not guarantee that any law firm will accept your case.