Ozempic (GLP-1) Lawsuit — Free Case Review
The Ozempic Litigation, Honestly Told
Two federal MDLs, no settlements yet, and real court tests ahead — find out in minutes whether your injury and records fit the current criteria.
No Ozempic or other GLP-1 lawsuit has been settled, and no court or jury has found that these medications caused anyone's injury — the litigation is ongoing, with major expert-evidence rulings still ahead. Whether any individual has a claim depends on their own medical records and the law of their state.
Did this happen to you — or someone you love?
Answered 24/7 · Free & confidential · No fee unless there is a recovery. Court costs and litigation expenses are advanced by counsel and repaid from the recovery. You are not responsible for court costs or litigation expenses if there is no recovery, unless a court directs otherwise. The attorney's fee is a percentage of the gross recovery, calculated before expenses are deducted.
Partners
Matthew T. Marin & Stefanie A. Murphy
Super Lawyers® honorees · American Association for Justice members
Ozempic inquiries get a personal review — and an honest answer either way, free and without obligation.
No Ozempic or other GLP-1 lawsuit has been settled, and no court or jury has found that these medications caused anyone's injury — the litigation is ongoing, with major expert-evidence rulings still ahead. Whether any individual has a claim depends on their own medical records and the law of their state. Do not stop, start, or change any prescribed medication because of anything on this page. Those decisions belong with your prescriber. Attorney Advertising.
From September 14–18, 2026 — rescheduled from September 10–18 (Doc. 881) — Judge Karen S. Marston is holding a Rule 702 (“Daubert”) hearing in the Ozempic stomach-injury MDL to decide whether the plaintiffs’ general-causation experts may testify — the single most consequential event in this litigation to date, because cases cannot reach juries without admissible causation evidence.
What a Rule 702 hearing is
Federal courts act as gatekeepers for expert testimony: before a jury can hear a scientist say “this drug can cause this injury,” the judge must find the opinion rests on reliable methods reliably applied. The court is evaluating defense motions to exclude eight of the plaintiffs’ experts. Separately, and on their own briefing schedule, Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly have moved for summary judgment on multiple injury categories (Docs. 676, 692, 694, 695, 697); those motions are pending and undecided. If plaintiffs’ general-causation experts are excluded, affected claims cannot proceed; if they survive, the litigation moves toward case-specific work with its central scientific question intact.
Why this hearing looms so large here
This court has already shown it takes the gate seriously. In August 2025, it excluded two of the plaintiffs’ diagnostic experts and ruled that gastroparesis claims require an objective gastric emptying study — a defense-favorable decision that reshaped the MDL’s intake standards (what that test is). The September hearing applies the same scrutiny to the heart of the case: whether GLP-1 medications can cause the persistent stomach injuries alleged. Defense arguments are expected to emphasize that delayed gastric emptying is the medications’ known, labeled mechanism and that diabetes itself causes gastroparesis; plaintiffs’ experts point to the volume and pattern of injury reports and the medications’ pharmacology. We are not going to predict the outcome — recent drug MDLs have gone both ways at exactly this stage.
What it means for people with claims
Three things are true at once. First, nothing about the hearing changes whether you were injured or what your records show — documentation gathered now keeps its value. Second, the hearing does not directly govern the separate NAION vision-loss MDL (MDL 3163), which is earlier in its life and proceeding on its own schedule. Third, the outcome will likely move every timeline in this litigation — toward resolution talk if plaintiffs’ experts survive, toward appeals and contraction if they don’t. Our tracker will carry the ruling the day it lands.
Free, confidential case review. Marin & Murphy is currently accepting Ozempic (GLP-1) stomach-injury and NAION vision-loss cases. No fee unless there is a recovery. Court costs and litigation expenses are advanced by counsel and repaid from the recovery. You are not responsible for court costs or litigation expenses if there is no recovery, unless a court directs otherwise. The attorney’s fee is a percentage of the gross recovery, calculated before expenses are deducted. Marin & Murphy is licensed in Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and South Carolina; matters elsewhere may be referred to lawyers licensed in your state.
Start your free case review or call (888) 348-2735 — answered 24/7.
See if you qualify
A few quick questions about which GLP-1 medication you took, your diagnosis and testing, and your treatment. This is the initial intake screening, not a full case review. Most people finish in about two minutes.
- 🔒 Confidential
- No obligation
- ⏱ ~2 minutes
Marin & Murphy Law Firm · Free & confidential · Stop messages anytime
Common questions
Is September 14–18, 2026 a trial?
No. No jury will be present and no verdict will issue. It is an evidentiary hearing about which expert opinions are reliable enough for future juries to hear.
Could the Ozempic lawsuits end at this hearing?
The stomach-injury claims could be severely narrowed if the court excludes plaintiffs’ general-causation experts and grants the related summary-judgment motion — that is a real possibility, not a formality. The NAION vision-loss MDL would continue regardless, on its own evidence.
Should I wait for the ruling before contacting a lawyer?
Waiting doesn’t improve a claim — state deadlines keep running and records keep aging regardless of the hearing. A review now costs nothing and tells you where you’d stand under either outcome.
When will the court rule?
There is no deadline; rulings after multi-day Rule 702 hearings commonly take weeks to months. Related briefing also continues after the hearing: the court set a schedule for motions to strike the plaintiffs’ sur-reply briefing running to October 7, 2026 (Doc. 880). No ruling on either the exclusion motions or the summary judgment motions has issued. We will update this page and the tracker when it issues.
Sources
- MDL 3094 docket, E.D. Pa. — Rule 702 hearing schedule and pending motions (as of Sept. 2026)
- MDL 3094 Doc. 468, Order on Cross-Cutting Issue 1 (Aug. 15, 2025)
- JPML Pending MDL Statistics Report (Sept. 2026)
No Ozempic or other GLP-1 lawsuit has been settled, and no court or jury has found that these medications caused anyone’s injury — the litigation is ongoing, with major expert-evidence rulings still ahead. Whether any individual has a claim depends on their own medical records and the law of their state.
Attorney Advertising.
This page is attorney advertising and is for informational purposes only; it is not legal or medical advice. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Contacting the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship.
The filings: the master complaint, the gastric-emptying-study order (Doc. 468), CMO 12 (NAION MDL), and the lawsuit tracker.
More on the Ozempic (GLP-1) litigation
- Ozempic lawsuit overview (hub)
- Ozempic & GLP-1 lawsuit tracker
- Settlement amounts: what’s actually known
- Verdicts & settlements ledger
- MDL 3163: the vision-loss court
- Stomach paralysis (gastroparesis) claims
- NAION vision-loss claims
- The gastric emptying study, explained
- How compensation works
- Is it too late to file?
- For spouses & caregivers