Millions of Americans took Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, or a similar GLP-1 drug expecting help managing diabetes or weight. What many weren’t told is that these medications can cause severe, sometimes permanent gastrointestinal injuries, including gastroparesis, a condition where the stomach stops emptying properly. For patients who developed these injuries, a large federal lawsuit is already underway, and it may be their best opportunity to hold the drug manufacturers accountable.
MDL 3094, also known as the GLP-1 RAs Products Liability Litigation, is now one of the largest pharmaceutical cases in the country, with thousands of plaintiffs joined together in federal court in Philadelphia. But the litigation is moving fast, and important court rulings are already affecting which cases qualify.
This page breaks down everything you need to know about MDL 3094 in 2026 — what the case is about, how it works, the major rulings shaping eligibility, how to join, and why acting promptly matters for your claim.
What Is MDL 3094?
MDL 3094, officially titled In re: Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists (GLP-1 RAs) Products Liability Litigation, is a federal multidistrict litigation consolidating thousands of personal injury lawsuits against the drug manufacturers of GLP-1 receptor agonist drugs. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and is presided over by Judge Karen Spencer Marston.
As of April 2026, more than 4,706 civil actions are pending in the MDL, a number that continues to grow as more injured patients come forward. The case involves plaintiffs from across the country, with cases transferred in from Alabama, California, Texas, New York, Florida, and dozens of other states.
At the center of the multidistrict litigation are allegations that the drug manufacturers knew, or should have known, that their GLP-1 medications posed a serious risk of severe gastrointestinal injury, but failed to adequately warn patients and their doctors. The primary injuries covered by MDL 3094 include:
- Gastroparesis (stomach paralysis or severely delayed gastric emptying)
- Ileus (paralysis of the small or large intestine)
- Bowel obstruction
- Severe nausea and vomiting requiring hospitalization
- Related serious GI complications
If you took Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, Zepbound, Rybelsus, or Saxenda and developed one of these conditions, your case may be eligible for inclusion in the GLP-1 MDL.
How MDL 3094 Differs from a Class Action
Many people hear “mass lawsuit” and assume they’d share a settlement equally with thousands of strangers. That’s how a class action works, but the GLP-1 MDL is structured very differently, and in ways that typically benefit individual plaintiffs.
In a class action, one or a few “representative” plaintiffs sue on behalf of the entire group. If the case settles, everyone splits the award based on a formula, regardless of how severe their individual injuries were. You may not even know you’re part of a class action until you receive a small check in the mail years later.
An MDL works differently. Each plaintiff keeps their own individual case. You file your own lawsuit with your own attorney, and any settlement or verdict reflects the specific facts of your situation — your medical history, the severity of your injuries, your lost wages, your pain and suffering. This matters enormously when comparing someone who was briefly hospitalized to someone who required surgery or developed a permanent disability.
What the MDL does share with a class action is efficiency. The court consolidates the early stages of multidistrict litigation — discovery, expert challenges, pretrial motions — so that the same foundational issues aren’t re-litigated in hundreds of different courtrooms. This saves time and expense. But when it comes to individual settlements, every plaintiff’s case is evaluated on its own merits. You retain your own attorney, you remain an active participant in your own claim, and no outcome is imposed on you without your consent.
The Two Active GLP-1 MDLs: GI Injuries and Vision Loss
MDL 3094 focuses exclusively on gastrointestinal injuries. But as research into GLP-1 drugs has expanded, a second category of harm has emerged, and a separate federal MDL has been created to address it.
In December 2025, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation established a new MDL (MDL 3163) for patients who developed non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION) after taking GLP-1 medications. NAION is a form of sudden, often irreversible vision loss caused by reduced blood flow to the optic nerve. Studies published in 2024 identified a potential association between GLP-1 drug use and NAION, prompting a wave of lawsuits from affected patients.
This means there are now two active GLP-1 multidistrict litigations running simultaneously:
| MDL | Injuries Covered | Status |
| MDL 3094 (GI) | Gastroparesis, ileus, bowel obstruction, severe GI complications | Active — 4,700+ cases |
| MDL 3163 (NAION Vision Loss) | Non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (sudden vision loss) | Established December 2025 — growing |
If you experienced severe GI injuries, your claim belongs in MDL 3094. If you developed vision problems, particularly sudden partial or complete vision loss in one eye, the NAION MDL 3163 may be the appropriate venue. Some patients may have grounds for claims in both. Consulting with an attorney is the only way to know which MDL applies to your situation.
Current Litigation Timeline: Where MDL 3094 Stands in 2026
MDL 3094 has progressed through several significant phases since it was established. Here’s where things stand as of early 2026.
Science Day
One of the most important early milestones was Science Day, a proceeding where both sides presented scientific evidence directly to Judge Marston. Plaintiffs’ experts argued that sustained GLP-1 drug use causes gastric dysfunction that meets the clinical definition of gastroparesis. Defense experts countered that the drugs temporarily slow gastric emptying without causing a true, diagnosable condition, suggesting the drugs may “unmask” pre-existing problems rather than create new ones.
Judge Marston’s exposure to this competing science is shaping how the court evaluates causation going forward.
Discovery
Pretrial discovery has been actively underway. This includes document production from Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly, deposition of key witnesses, and the exchange of expert reports. In October 2024, the court rejected plaintiffs’ attempt to obtain broader early discovery, as reported by Drug and Device Law Blog, a ruling that signaled the court’s intention to keep the litigation on a structured, measured timeline.
Case Management Order No. 30
Entered in January 2026, CMO 30 set key deadlines for expert disclosures, Daubert briefing schedules, and the path toward bellwether trial selection. Daubert motions are challenges to the admissibility of expert testimony, and in pharmaceutical MDLs, they often determine whether cases can proceed at all.
Bellwether Trials
No formal bellwether trial date has been set as of early 2026. Bellwether trials are small groups of representative cases tried first, with the results serving as a gauge of how the broader litigation might resolve.
Before bellwethers can be selected, the court must work through expert challenges and resolve key legal and scientific disputes. These trials typically have an outsized influence on global settlement negotiations.
The August 2025 Gastroparesis Ruling: What It Means for Your Case
In August 2025, Judge Marston tightened the requirements for gastroparesis claims. The ruling established that plaintiffs must have a gastric emptying study (GES) in their medical records to support a gastroparesis diagnosis.
A gastric emptying study is a nuclear medicine imaging test that measures how quickly food moves through the stomach. It is a standard test for diagnosing gastroparesis. Before this ruling, some cases were being pursued based on symptoms alone — severe nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain — without GES confirmation of delayed gastric emptying.
The ruling had two major effects. First, it narrowed the pool of eligible cases by filtering out claims without GES diagnostic support. Second, it strengthened the remaining cases by confirming that courts will require objective medical evidence, not just symptom reports. If your gastroparesis was diagnosed through a gastric emptying study, your case may now be better positioned than it would have been before this ruling.
For patients who experienced severe GI symptoms but never received a formal GES, this is an important development. It does not necessarily mean your case is ineligible; other serious injuries like bowel obstruction and ileus may not require the same diagnostic test, but it does mean that early legal evaluation is more important than ever. An attorney can review your medical records and advise you on whether your documentation supports a claim under the current standards.
If you took a GLP-1 drug and suffered serious GI harm, speaking with an attorney now, before additional rulings further define eligibility, is the most important step you can take.
The Defendants: Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly
MDL 3094 names two pharmaceutical giants as defendants. Novo Nordisk manufactures four GLP-1 drugs associated with the litigation:
- Ozempic (semaglutide, injectable, approved for type 2 diabetes)
- Wegovy (semaglutide, higher-dose injectable, approved for weight loss)
- Rybelsus (semaglutide, oral tablet, approved for type 2 diabetes)
- Saxenda (liraglutide, injectable, approved for weight loss)
Eli Lilly manufactures two GLP-1 drugs, also named in the litigation:
- Mounjaro (tirzepatide, injectable, approved for type 2 diabetes)
- Zepbound (tirzepatide, injectable, approved for weight loss)
The core legal theory against both companies is the same: they failed to provide adequate warnings about the risk of serious, potentially permanent GI injuries. Plaintiffs argue that the drug manufacturers had access to data suggesting these potential risks and had a duty to communicate them clearly to patients and prescribing physicians. Instead, the drugs were marketed aggressively, particularly for weight loss, while serious risks were downplayed or omitted from labeling.
Both companies deny liability and maintain that their drugs are safe and effective when used as directed. The litigation will ultimately test those positions.
How to Join the GLP-1 MDL
Joining MDL 3094 starts with a conversation, not a court filing. Here’s how the process generally works:
Step 1: Initial Consultation
The first step is speaking with a personal injury attorney who handles pharmaceutical MDL cases. During this conversation, you’ll describe your drug use history and your injuries. The attorney will assess whether your case has the basic elements needed to move forward.
Step 2: Medical Record Review
If your initial consultation suggests you may have a viable claim, your attorney will gather and review your medical records, including prescriptions, diagnoses, hospitalizations, and any relevant diagnostic testing such as a gastric emptying study. This is where the August 2025 ruling becomes especially relevant.
Step 3: Filing Your Lawsuit
If your records support a claim, your attorney will file a lawsuit on your behalf. This can be filed directly in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, or it can be filed in your home federal district and transferred into the MDL through a conditional transfer order (CTO).
Step 4: Case Transfer and Coordination
Once filed and transferred, your case becomes part of MDL 3094. The common pretrial proceedings — discovery, expert challenges, motions — apply to your case along with all others. But your individual case file, your records, and your specific damages remain your own.
Step 5: Resolution
Cases in an MDL can resolve through individual settlement, global settlement negotiations, or, if the case goes that far, trial. You will have the right to accept or reject any settlement offer. Nothing is imposed on you without your agreement.
The entire process requires an attorney who understands how pharmaceutical MDLs work and what it takes to build a strong individual case within one. Contact Wagstaff & Cartmell to discuss whether your GLP-1 injury qualifies for inclusion in MDL 3094.
Statute of Limitations: Why Timing Matters
Every personal injury claim has a filing deadline, called the statute of limitations, after which courts will refuse to hear the case, no matter how serious the injury. For GLP-1 lawsuits, those deadlines vary significantly from state to state, ranging from one year to six years depending on where you live and when your injury was discovered.
The Discovery Rule
Most states apply what’s called the “discovery rule,” which means the clock starts running from the date you knew, or reasonably should have known, that your injury was connected to the GLP-1 drug. If you were diagnosed with gastroparesis and no one told you it might be linked to Ozempic or Mounjaro for months or years, you may have more time than you think. But that window is not unlimited.
What makes this complicated is that the statute of limitations analysis is highly individual. It depends on your state, when you were first diagnosed, when you stopped taking the drug, and what information was available to you at the time. There is no universal deadline that applies to every case.
What is universal is this: waiting does not help your claim. Evidence becomes harder to gather. Medical records become more difficult to obtain. Witnesses’ memories fade. And if a state-specific deadline passes before you file, your case may be permanently barred, regardless of how serious your injuries were or how strong your underlying claim would have been.
If you took a GLP-1 drug and believe you suffered a serious GI injury as a result, talking to an attorney sooner rather than later is the most important thing you can do to protect your rights.
Why Wagstaff & Cartmell for Your GLP-1 Claim
MDL litigation is among the most complex civil litigations that exist. It requires attorneys who understand how to operate at the intersection of individual client representation and large-scale coordinated litigation — two skill sets that don’t always coexist in the same firm.
Wagstaff & Cartmell brings a specific track record to pharmaceutical MDL work. The firm has been appointed to plaintiffs’ leadership in seven pelvic mesh MDLs, a significant honor that requires court confidence in a firm’s competence and resources, and those cases resulted in over $7.25 billion for injured women. That kind of MDL leadership experience is directly relevant to GLP-1 litigation, where the same skills in coordinating discovery, challenging drug manufacturer defenses, and building individual case value are essential.
The firm’s mass tort practice is built around representing people who were harmed by products that companies knew or should have known were dangerous. GLP-1 cases fit squarely within that work. Wagstaff & Cartmell represents plaintiffs who developed gastroparesis, ileus, bowel obstruction, and related GI injuries after taking Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, Zepbound, Rybelsus, or Saxenda.
Monthly Litigation Update
Last Updated: April 2026 — 4,706+ Cases Pending in MDL 3094
The GLP-1 MDL docket continues to grow as injured patients learn about their legal options. Case Management Order No. 30, entered in January 2026, is driving the litigation toward expert disclosures and Daubert briefing. Judge Marston has yet to set a formal bellwether trial date, but the litigation schedule is moving steadily toward that milestone.
The August 2025 gastroparesis ruling requiring gastric emptying study documentation remains in effect and continues to shape case eligibility. The NAION vision loss MDL, established in December 2025, is also accepting new cases from patients who developed sudden vision loss while taking GLP-1 medications.
MDL 3094 FAQ
Here are some of the questions we receive most often about MDL 3094.
MDL 3094 covers Ozempic lawsuits, as well as those involving Wegovy, Rybelsus, and Saxenda (all made by Novo Nordisk), and Mounjaro and Zepbound (both made by Eli Lilly). These are all GLP-1 receptor agonist medications prescribed for type 2 diabetes or weight loss.
Following the August 2025 ruling, claims based on gastroparesis should be supported by a gastric emptying study in your medical records. However, other serious GI injuries, including ileus and bowel obstruction, may have different documentation requirements. An attorney can review your specific records to determine whether your injuries support a claim.
Multidistrict litigation typically takes several years from filing to resolution. The timeline depends on how quickly the court moves through expert challenges and bellwether trials, and whether global settlement negotiations succeed. Some plaintiffs resolve their cases earlier through individual settlements; others may wait for a broader resolution.
Not necessarily. Many MDL plaintiffs never set foot in a courtroom. The common pretrial proceedings happen in Philadelphia before Judge Marston, but your attorney handles those. If your case is selected as a bellwether or proceeds to individual trial, travel could become relevant, but for most plaintiffs, the process is managed largely by their legal team.
Possibly, yes. The statute of limitations is measured from when you knew or should have known your injury was related to the drug, not necessarily from when you took it. If you stopped taking Ozempic several years ago but were only recently diagnosed with gastroparesis, or only recently learned of the potential connection, you may still be within your filing window.
Vision loss claims, specifically those involving NAION, are handled under a separate MDL established in December 2025. If you experienced both GI injuries and vision problems, you may have potential claims in both proceedings. An attorney can evaluate each injury and advise on the appropriate course of action.
No. Wagstaff & Cartmell offers free case evaluations for GLP-1 plaintiff claims. The firm handles these cases on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay no legal fees unless and until your case results in a recovery.
If the defendants negotiate a global settlement, as often happens in large pharmaceutical MDLs, each plaintiff evaluates the offer independently. You are never required to accept a settlement you disagree with. Your attorney will advise you on whether a proposed settlement fairly compensates you for your specific injuries and losses.
Contact Our Law Firm for a Free Consultation on GLP-1 Class Action Lawsuits
If you or someone you love was seriously harmed after taking one of these weight loss drugs, reach out to Wagstaff & Cartmell for a free consultation. There’s no obligation, and it’s the first step toward understanding your legal options.