What Is the Status of the Dupixent Lawsuit in Wisconsin?

Super Lawyers® 2014–2024(888) 348-2735

Dupixent — CTCL Litigation

The Dupixent Litigation, Explained

Federal cases are consolidated in MDL 3180, most cases are in their earliest stages, and no settlement exists. Here is what is publicly known.

ACTIVE LITIGATION — NO SETTLEMENT. MDL 3180 underway · deadlines vary by state.

Marin & Murphy is not licensed in Wisconsin; details below.

Partners

Stefanie A. Murphy & Matthew T. Marin

Super Lawyers® honorees · members of the American Association for Justice · concentrating in personal injury and mass-tort litigation.

No settlement has been reached in the Dupixent litigation, and most cases are in their earliest stages. Every case must be proven on its own facts. Whether any patient has a claim depends on the facts and the law of their state. The information below covers the litigation itself.

Marin & Murphy Law Firm is not licensed in Wisconsin; details below.

The Dupixent CTCL Litigation: Where Things Stand

Dupixent (dupilumab), a Sanofi and Regeneron prescription biologic prescribed to patients in Wisconsin and nationwide, has been FDA-approved since March 2017 and now carries nine indications, including atopic dermatitis, asthma, and COPD. The order that matters for Wisconsin filings came in June 2026: the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized the pending federal cases as MDL 3180 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, before Judge Zahid N. Quraishi. The complaints in the consolidated Dupixent lawsuit allege that the drug is associated with an increased risk of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) and that the manufacturers failed to warn patients and doctors. Thirty-eight pending cases were on the MDL docket — the same proceeding a case from Wisconsin would join — as of October 1, 2026; the MDL 3180 tracker keeps the current count and its method. For Wisconsin claimants as for all others, no court has ruled on the merits and no settlement exists.

The Allegations — and Their Limits

The allegation — in Wisconsin as anywhere else — is an association, not an adjudicated fact. Published studies report a statistical association between dupilumab and CTCL — an association the study authors themselves note does not establish causation — and the FDA has identified a potential safety signal for CTCL that it is still evaluating. The Dupixent label dispensed in Wisconsin, as everywhere, carries no lymphoma or malignancy warning today. The FDA adverse event reports connected to this question are agency reports, not verified causes, and the courts have decided nothing on the merits — in Wisconsin or anywhere else.

Is Anyone From Wisconsin Already in the Dupixent Litigation?

Possibly, but the public record does not yet let us say so responsibly. All federal Dupixent CTCL cases are consolidated in MDL 3180 in the District of New Jersey, and the MDL’s member-case complaints are mostly not in the free public record; a case’s original filing court also does not establish where the plaintiff lives. This page therefore reports the litigation’s overall posture through the MDL 3180 tracker rather than an unverified Wisconsin figure, and it will describe a Wisconsin resident’s case when a publicly available complaint documents one.

Who Falls Within the Filed Cases?

People in the consolidated cases — a group any qualifying claimant from Wisconsin would join — used Dupixent and received a diagnosis of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma or a related T-cell subtype during or after use. No minimum duration of Dupixent use is required — in Wisconsin or anywhere — and the group includes estate claims, brought under state wrongful-death and survival statutes, for patients who have died. Whether any individual’s circumstances resemble the filed cases is a question of medical records and state law, not of headlines — and for a Wisconsin resident, it is a question for an attorney licensed in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin’s Federal Courts and the Path to MDL 3180

Wisconsin is served by two federal district courts: the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin and the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. A Dupixent CTCL lawsuit filed there does not proceed alone: the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has centralized these cases as MDL 3180 before Judge Zahid N. Quraishi in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, so a Wisconsin case is transferred to the MDL for coordinated pretrial proceedings — or, where the MDL court’s case-management orders permit, filed in the District of New Jersey directly. The destination is the same consolidated proceeding either way; a claim from Wisconsin stays an individual claim, because an MDL is not a class action.

Filing Deadlines Under Wisconsin Law

Wisconsin’s general statute of limitations for personal-injury claims is three years under Wis. Stat. § 893.54(1m). Wisconsin applies a discovery rule: accrual is deferred until the injury is discovered or reasonably should have been discovered, whichever occurs first. How a limitations period applies to any specific CTCL diagnosis depends on the dates in the medical records, the legal theory pleaded, and Wisconsin tolling and accrual doctrine. An attorney licensed in Wisconsin can evaluate whether a claim is timely.

A wrongful-death claim carries a three-year period that begins at death (Wis. Stat. § 893.54(1m)(b)), brought by the personal representative.

How Common Is CTCL in Wisconsin?

Wisconsin is home to about 6 million people (U.S. Census Bureau, 2024 estimate). Cutaneous T-cell lymphoma is rare — roughly 8.55 new cases per million person-years (SEER) — which works out to on the order of 50 new CTCL diagnoses across Wisconsin in a typical year. Because the disease is so rare, no statistic here answers an individual question; in Wisconsin, a single claim turns on medical records read against state law.

About Marin & Murphy Law Firm and Wisconsin

Marin & Murphy Law Firm is a personal-injury and mass-tort law firm; its attorneys’ individual admissions are listed at the bottom of this page, and this page is published as litigation information. Marin & Murphy Law Firm is not licensed in Wisconsin. The firm does not accept Wisconsin legal matters; inquiries from Wisconsin residents are referred to attorneys licensed in Wisconsin. Some matters may be referred to other lawyers. An attorney licensed in Wisconsin can evaluate whether a claim is timely and how Wisconsin law applies to a particular diagnosis.

Wisconsin Dupixent Litigation FAQs