Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit Case Management Orders (MDL 3194)
On October 2, 2026, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) centralized federal lawsuits over Abbott Laboratories spinal cord stimulators as In re: Abbott Laboratories Spinal Cord Stimulator Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3194, before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago). On October 13, 2026, Judge Jenkins entered Case Management Order No. 1, which consolidates the cases for pretrial purposes, stays discovery, and sets an initial status hearing and scheduling conference for November 12, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. Central Time. Plaintiffs allege that Abbott’s Proclaim, Eterna, and legacy St. Jude Medical systems are defective and that Abbott failed to adequately warn physicians and patients. Abbott disputes these claims. Nigh Goldenberg Raso & Vaughn (NGRV) is accepting inquiries from patients with serious complications.
This page is a resource for court orders, scheduling information, and docket developments in MDL 3194. Our mass tort litigation team reviews the docket and updates this page as pretrial proceedings unfold before Judge Jenkins. For background on the claims, see our Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit page.
Need Legal Representation for an Abbott Stimulator?
If you or a loved one suffered severe neurological complications, uncontrolled shocks, burning, loss of therapy, or required revision or explant surgery after an Abbott or St. Jude Medical spinal cord stimulator implant, call or text (202) 792-7927 for a free, confidential case evaluation.
Important: Do not alter your device settings or schedule removal of your device without first speaking with your treating physician. A legal consultation does not replace medical advice.
Master Docket Information
Courtroom 2119, Dirksen Courthouse
Key Developments and Case Schedule
- June 2026A motion to centralize the federal Abbott spinal cord stimulator cases was filed with the JPML, after the Panel had declined to create an industry-wide MDL on June 5, 2026.
- September 24, 2026The JPML heard argument on the Abbott and Nevro motions to create separate, manufacturer-specific proceedings.
- October 2, 2026The JPML entered its transfer order creating MDL 3194 and assigning it to Judge Jenkins. A separate order created MDL 3195 for Nevro.
- October 13, 2026Judge Jenkins entered Case Management Order No. 1, consolidating the cases for pretrial purposes, staying discovery, and setting the initial conference.
- November 9, 2026Deadline for any party that wants to address a topic not on the court’s agenda to file a “Request for Inclusion on November 12 Agenda.”
- November 12, 2026, 10:00 a.m. CTInitial status hearing and scheduling conference, held in person in Courtroom 2119 of the Dirksen Courthouse, 219 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, before Judge Jenkins.
- After November 12, 2026The court has stated that it does not intend to select a leadership structure at the November 12 hearing but intends to do so promptly afterward.
Court Orders and Filings
2 orders listed, newest first.
2026
- 10/13/2026 LatestCase Management Order No. 1: Initial Practice and Procedure, Discovery Stay, and Initial Conference SchedulePDF
- 10/02/2026JPML Transfer Order: Creation of MDL No. 3194, In re: Abbott Laboratories Spinal Cord Stimulator Products Liability LitigationPDF
Note: Subsequent pretrial orders, case management orders, direct filing orders, and complaint templates will be added after the court enters them.
Summary of Case Management Order No. 1 (October 13, 2026)
Case Management Order No. 1 sets the basic rules for the litigation while the court organizes the MDL. Its main provisions are:
- Consolidation for pretrial purposes. All actions transferred to Judge Jenkins as part of MDL 3194, and any later-filed “tag-along” actions, are consolidated for pretrial purposes automatically, without a motion. The order states that this is not a determination that the cases should be consolidated for trial, and it does not make anyone a party to an action in which they were not named.
- Master case file and filing rules. The Clerk maintains a master case file under Case No. 25 CV 12714. A filing that applies to all cases should state “This Document Relates to All Cases.” A filing that applies only to some cases should be filed in both the master case and the individual case and state “This Document Relates to” the relevant case number.
- Extension of response deadlines. Any defendant that has not yet responded to a complaint receives an extension until a date to be set later, a topic the court will address at the initial conference.
- Discovery stay. Pending the initial conference and further order, all outstanding discovery is stayed and no further discovery may be initiated, subject to relief for good cause, such as the ill health of a proposed deponent.
- Pending motions and prior orders. Motions that predate transfer are terminated and must be refiled in this court. Orders from transferor courts that set deadlines for pleadings, pretrial disclosures, or discovery are vacated.
- Preservation of evidence. Until the court enters a formal preservation order, all plaintiffs and defendants must take reasonable steps to preserve documents, electronically stored information, and tangible things potentially relevant to the litigation.
- Corporate disclosures. Parties subject to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 must make the required disclosures.
The November 12, 2026 Initial Conference
The court set the MDL and all transferred cases for an initial status hearing and scheduling conference on November 12, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. Central Time. The hearing is in person, and in-person attendance is required to be heard. For later conferences, the court plans to arrange WebEx participation for counsel who wish to be heard and teleconference listening for others. The court also asked plaintiffs with similar interests to try to agree on one attorney to speak on their behalf, and said that designation will not affect any later decision on leadership. The subjects the court listed for the hearing are:
- A process for appointing lead counsel and/or a plaintiffs’ steering committee, to the extent appropriate
- Whether consolidated complaints should be filed, and when
- Deadlines for responses to existing complaints or to any consolidated or amended complaints
- Orders directing preservation of evidence and a protocol for discovery of electronically stored information (ESI)
- Other topics, which any party may request by filing a “Request for Inclusion on November 12 Agenda” by November 9, 2026
Plaintiffs’ Leadership
The order states that the court intends to discuss at the November 12 hearing a process for appointing lead counsel and/or a steering committee for plaintiffs, as well as liaison counsel for plaintiffs and defendants. The primary criteria the court identified are willingness and availability to commit to a time-consuming project, ability to work cooperatively with others, professional experience in this type of litigation, access to sufficient resources, and diversity. The court will consider only attorneys who have filed an appearance in an action that is part of the MDL.
Actions Listed in the Order’s Attachment A
The order’s attachment lists 15 actions transferred by the JPML, pending in seven federal districts. The order also notes that the JPML has entered conditional transfer orders in other cases and that additional cases are expected to be transferred.
| Originating District | Actions Listed |
|---|---|
| Northern District of Illinois | 8 |
| Northern District of California | 2 |
| Central District of California | 1 |
| Eastern District of California | 1 |
| District of Maryland | 1 |
| District of New Jersey | 1 |
| Northern District of New York | 1 |
What to Expect Next in MDL 3194
Based on CMO No. 1, the next developments in Abbott MDL 3194 are:
- November 12, 2026: The initial status hearing and scheduling conference in Chicago.
- Leadership selection: The court has indicated it will decide on a leadership structure promptly after the hearing, rather than at it.
- Further orders: The agenda items, including consolidated complaints, response deadlines, and a preservation and ESI protocol, are likely subjects of later orders. The court has not yet set dates for them.
As of October 19, 2026, CMO No. 1 is the only case management order we have identified in MDL 3194, and no direct filing order, bellwether schedule, or settlement has been announced. We will update this page as orders are entered.
Why Abbott Has Its Own MDL
The JPML declined to create a single industry-wide MDL and instead centralized spinal cord stimulator cases by manufacturer, reasoning that little efficiency would be gained by placing cases against multiple manufacturers before one judge. Federal spinal cord stimulator claims are now organized as follows:
Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins
Claims involving other manufacturers, including Medtronic, are not part of these MDLs.
Understanding the Claims in Abbott MDL 3194
Plaintiffs allege the following, and Abbott disputes these claims. None of the allegations has been proven.
- The MRI mode recall: The FDA classified as a Class I recall Abbott’s correction of Proclaim and Infinity implantable pulse generators after patients reported being unable to exit MRI mode, which can disable therapy and may require surgery. The recall covered 155,028 devices. Abbott’s Infinity IPGs are used for deep brain stimulation, not spinal cord stimulation.
- Post-approval modifications: Plaintiffs allege that Abbott changed firmware, battery systems, waveforms, and leads through numerous PMA supplements without the clinical evidence a new approval would require.
- Failure to warn: Plaintiffs allege that Abbott knew of device instability, wireless communication failures, and lead problems but did not adequately warn physicians and patients.
- Lead migration and breakage: Plaintiffs allege that lead problems have caused loss of therapy, nerve injury, and the need for revision surgery.
For a full discussion, see our Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit page.
Why Follow Abbott MDL 3194 With NGRV?
Multidistrict litigation against a global medical device manufacturer requires leadership experience and medical literacy.
- Court-appointed leadership. Our founding partners have been appointed by federal judges to Plaintiffs’ Steering and Executive Committees in national litigations, including In re: Valsartan, Losartan, and Irbesartan Products Liability Litigation (MDL 2875), In re: Paraquat Products Liability Litigation (MDL 3004), In re: Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation (MDL 3084), and In re: Davol, Inc./C.R. Bard, Inc., Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation (MDL 2846).
- Clinical perspective. Brett Vaughn is both a trial attorney and a licensed Registered Nurse (RN, BSN), which supports careful review of device records, operative notes, and neurological injuries.
- Contingency fee representation. NGRV represents clients on a contingency fee basis. We advance litigation costs and expert expenses, and if there is no recovery on your behalf, you owe no attorney fees.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is an MDL case management order?
A case management order is a directive from the presiding federal judge that sets the schedule, evidence protocols, filing rules, and other procedures for the cases consolidated in a multidistrict litigation. In some MDLs these are called pretrial orders.
What did Case Management Order No. 1 do in Abbott MDL 3194?
Entered October 13, 2026, CMO No. 1 consolidates the transferred cases for pretrial purposes, creates a master case file under Case No. 25 CV 12714, extends defendants’ time to respond to complaints, stays discovery until the initial conference, requires reasonable steps to preserve relevant evidence, and sets an initial status hearing and scheduling conference for November 12, 2026.
When is the first hearing in Abbott MDL 3194?
Judge Jenkins set the initial status hearing and scheduling conference for November 12, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. Central Time. It will be held in person in Courtroom 2119 of the Dirksen Courthouse, 219 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois.
How will plaintiffs’ leadership be chosen in MDL 3194?
CMO No. 1 states that the court will discuss a process for appointing lead counsel and/or a steering committee at the November 12 hearing and intends to select a leadership structure promptly afterward. The court will consider only attorneys who have filed an appearance in an action that is part of the MDL. The stated criteria include availability, ability to work cooperatively, professional experience, resources, and diversity.
How do I file a claim in Abbott MDL 3194?
Injured individuals file an individual lawsuit through counsel. As of October 19, 2026, no direct filing order has been entered in MDL 3194. Until one is entered, cases are filed in an appropriate federal court and then transferred to the Northern District of Illinois. Filing a claim does not extend the statute of limitations, so timing matters.
Does an MDL order affect my individual case?
Yes. MDL orders govern shared discovery, evidence preservation, and any bellwether trial schedule. However, your damages, medical injuries, revision surgeries, and any settlement amount remain individual to you.
Where is the Abbott MDL located?
MDL 3194 is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, in Chicago, before Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins. The Dirksen Courthouse is at 219 South Dearborn Street.
Can I file if my Abbott stimulator has not been removed?
Possibly. If your Abbott or St. Jude Medical stimulator is causing severe shocks, lead migration, or loss of therapy, you may have a claim even if the device has not been surgically removed. A consultation can help determine whether your circumstances warrant filing.
Sources and References
- Case Management Order No. 1, MDL 3194 (N.D. Ill., Oct. 13, 2026)
- NGRV, MDL tracker and JPML transfer orders
- Becker’s Spine, Abbott and Nevro cases sent to two federal courts
- Bloomberg Law, Abbott and Nevro spinal cord stimulator lawsuits consolidated
- Law360, JPML denies industry-wide MDL, June 5, 2026
- FDA recall notice, Abbott Proclaim and Infinity IPGs (MRI mode)
- Becker’s Spine, recall device count and distribution dates
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. The information on this page is for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal or medical advice. Allegations described are claims made by plaintiffs in active litigation and have not been proven. Contacting NGRV does not by itself create an attorney-client relationship.
