Patients who suffered serious injuries such as burns, electric shock, lead wire migration or fracture, infection, nerve damage, paralysis, worsened pain or a need for revision surgery may qualify to file a lawsuit and pursue financial compensation with the help of our experienced spinal cord stimulator lawyers.
Spinal cord stimulator lawsuits allege that manufacturers have sold certain spinal cord stimulator devices that had known defects while concealing risks from physicians and patients.
Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit: Key Takeaways
- Patients harmed by defective spinal cord stimulator devices may qualify to file lawsuits against manufacturers.
- Qualifying injuries include burns, electric shocks, lead migration, infection and nerve damage.
- Manufacturers named in active litigation include Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic and Nevro.
- Lawsuits seek to recover damages for medical bills, pain, suffering, future medical care and lost wages.
- California’s statute of limitations generally gives injured patients two years from discovering an injury was caused by a medical device to file a lawsuit.
Spinal cord stimulator lawsuits are civil claims filed by patients harmed by defective implantable pain devices. They target manufacturers like Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic and Nevro for defective design, manufacturing failures and failure to warn.
We represent patients who have suffered burns, electrical shocks, lead migration, infection and nerve damage from defective spinal cord stimulator devices. We also represent families of patients who died from device-related complications.
The FDA’s MAUDE database received over 107,000 complaints from spinal cord stimulator patients between 2016 and 2020 alone. The FDA has issued numerous device recalls.
Call our experienced defective medical device lawyers today for a FREE consultation at (800) 718-4658 or contact us if you or a loved one developed a serious or severe injury because of a defective spinal cord stimulator. We will charge you no legal fee until we win your case.
Why Spinal Cord Stimulator Victims Choose Our Lawyers
- Experience handling complex defective medical device claims
- Resources to take on major manufacturers like Abbott, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific
- Access to medical experts to prove causation and device failure
- Trial-ready representation for high-value, contested claims
Learn more about what sets our firm apart – find out about The Nadrich Difference.
Table of Contents
- Latest Update
- Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit Overview
- Who Qualifies for a Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit?
- Manufacturers Facing Spinal Cord Stimulator Claims
- Injuries Linked to Defective Spinal Stimulators
- What Is My Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit Worth?
- How Long Do I Have to File a Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit?
- Frequently Asked Questions
- When to Contact a Spinal Cord Stimulator Attorney
- Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit Updates – 2026
Latest Update
August 26, 2026 Update
The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has scheduled oral arguments for next month. The arguments will decide if all Abbott and Nevro spinal cord stimulator lawsuits will get consolidated into two federal MDLs.
August 14 saw the JPML issue a Notice of Hearing Session that indicated it will hear the arguments regarding Nevro and Abbott spinal cord stimulator lawsuit consolidation in Illinois on September 24, 2026.
The order indicates there are 15 Abbott lawsuits in seven United States District Courts, and 17 Nevro lawsuits in six United States District Courts.
The motions have been opposed by the manufacturers, who claim that the lawsuits don’t indicate a specific defect or common injury, and that the lawsuit numbers aren’t high enough to make consolidation be efficient.
All federal Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator lawsuits were consolidated into an MDL in June.
Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit Overview
Spinal cord stimulators (SCS) are small implantable devices placed near the spinal cord to interrupt chronic pain signals such as those involved in chronic nerve pain. They consist of pulse generators (battery units) and thin electrode leads placed in the epidural space.
SCS devices, including rechargeable spinal cord stimulators, are typically prescribed for chronic pain conditions which are resistant to medication, such as failed back surgery syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome.
Recent updates are indicated that spinal cord stimulator lawsuits are being filed on behalf of those who experienced severe complications after receiving the devices. Allegations focus on inadequate warnings about risks as well as manufacturing defects and design defects. Patients have a right to be fully informed regarding all potential complications that are related to medical devices, including the long-term consequences of failed devices.
The FDA has been sent tens of thousands of adverse event reports which involve spinal cord stimulators, including reports that are associated with death and serious injury..
Defective device components commonly involve overheating, battery failures, fracture and lead wire migration. Lead complications, which include wire fractures and migration, are common grounds for litigation in defective medical device cases.
Reported complications from spinal cord stimulators may lead to severe outcomes like electric shocks, infection, paralysis, device migration and loss of effective pain relief following surgery.
In addition, spinal cord stimulators may lead to serious complications such as a need for revision surgery, neurological injury or worsening pain.
Plaintiffs in spinal cord stimulator lawsuits are arguing that manufacturers made substantial changes to the devices without submitting new Premarket Approval applications despite those modifications materially affecting safety profiles.
A comprehensive review confirms that SCS devices are prone to hardware failures, neurological injury and infection even under normal use conditions. Reported complication rates range from 5.3 to 40 percent.
The FDA has issued over 40 SCS device recalls since 2010.
The process of filing spinal cord stimulator lawsuits usually involves collecting evidence, including expert evaluations and medical records, to demonstrate the impact of the medical device’s failure upon the life of the patient.
Who Qualifies for a Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit?
Patients who had a defective spinal cord stimulator implanted and suffered a qualifying injury may be entitled to financial compensation.
Qualifying injuries include:
- Burns caused by battery malfunction or device overheating
- Electrocution or electric shock from the device short-circuiting
- Lead wire migration or fracture
- Infection arising after the initial implant surgery heals
- Nerve damage, paralysis or worsened chronic pain caused by device failure
- Revision surgery required to remove or replace a failed device
Patients can file a direct, individual lawsuit against the manufacturer that harmed them.
Surviving loved ones may file wrongful death claims if patients died due to complications from defective devices.
You do not need to have filed a formal complaint with the FDA or the medical device manufacturer to qualify.
Contact us for a free case evaluation to determine if your specific device model is linked to active recalls or litigation.
Manufacturers Facing Spinal Cord Stimulator Claims
Manufacturers who are facing SCS claims include:
- Abbott/St. Jude Medical: Allegations include defective leads leading to migration and electrical shocks.
- Boston Scientific: Named in lawsuits involving the WaveWriter Alpha and other systems. The lawsuits allege injuries such as nerve damage and severe pain.
- Medtronic: Faces claims regarding device failures (e.g. Intellis system) causing chronic pain and complications. Some lawsuits allege a failure to report safety data.
- Nevro: Faces claims that their Senza systems are defectively designed and cause injuries requiring surgical removal.
Injuries Linked to Defective Spinal Stimulators
Spinal cord stimulator risks range from treatable complications to permanent neurological damage.
Injuries documented in FDA adverse event reports and ongoing lawsuits include:
- Nerve damage and neuropathy
- Electrical burns near the implantation site
- Paralysis or loss of motor function
- Infection from repeated revision surgeries
- Worsened or new-onset chronic pain
- Spinal cord injury from lead migration
- Wrongful death
Patients may also suffer secondary injuries from revision surgeries required to correct device malfunctions and failures, including anesthesia risks and prolonged recovery.
The FDA’s MAUDE database contains over 118,000 injury reports tied to completely implanted spinal cord stimulators.
What Is My Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit Worth?
Current estimates place a lot of spinal cord stimulator lawsuit claims between $90,000 and $2.5 million. The value depends on the treatment required and the severity of the injury.
Some estimates hint at an average spinal cord stimulator settlement of about $1.9 million. This figure is based upon a limited pool of cases reported, though.
Another report has put the average closer to $303,173. This indicates significant variability regarding settlement amounts based upon individual case circumstances.
Cases which involve one revision surgery without explantation are commonly valued at the lower end of the settlement range, typically from $90,000 to $250,000.
The value of a spinal stimulator lawsuit will usually depend on the extent of documented injury, the number of revision surgeries, whether the device was removed, the strength of evidence and the degree of manufacturer negligence.
No settlement value can be guaranteed. Results depend on case-specific factors.
Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Each case is unique and results depend on cases’ specific factors.
Our law firm can help you recover financial compensation for:
Medical Bills
Our firm can help you recover compensation for all past and future medical expenses related to your SCS device, including revision surgeries, long-term care, ER visits, hospital stays, doctor visits, medications, medical procedures, medical testing, rehabilitation, physical therapy and more.
Lost Wages
We can help you recover compensation for any wages you’re unable to earn due to your SCS device, including wages you didn’t earn because you were hurt too bad to work or because you had to attend medical appointments.
Loss of Earning Capacity
Our firm can help you recover compensation for any loss or reduction of earning capacity resulting from a disability caused by an SCS device.
Pain and Suffering
We can help you recover compensation for all physical pain, mental suffering, emotional distress and lost quality of life caused by your SCS device.
Wrongful Death
If you lost a loved one due to complications from an SCS device, we can help you recover compensation for funeral and burial costs, the medical bills your loved one incurred before passing, the pain and suffering your loved one endured before passing, and the loss of your loved one’s love, companionship, spousal benefits, household services and income.
Punitive Damages
We may be able to recover punitive damages on your behalf if it can be proven that the manufacturer of your SCS device acted recklessly or willfully.
How Long Do I Have to File a Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit?
The statute of limitations for defective medical device claims in California is two years from the date that it is discovered that an injury was caused by a medical device.
The statute of limitations for filing spinal cord stimulator lawsuits varies by state. It typically ranges from one to six years from the date the injury occurred or was discovered.
The clock may start from when you were notified of a recall if your device was subject to an FDA recall.
Federal cases involving certain device manufacturers may be subject to different timing rules depending on how the claim is structured.
Don’t wait, call us today for a FREE consultation so evidence can be preserved, your claim can be filed on time and we have as much time as possible to build a strong case for you.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a Spinal Stimulator Cause Nerve Damage?
Yes, spinal cord stimulator devices can cause nerve damage.
Patients have experienced serious complications such as loss of bladder or bowel control, autonomic dysfunction and other symptoms linked with nerve injury after spinal cord stimulator implantation.
Key risks and causes of nerve damage include:
- Improper placement: This can lead to damaging the nerve roots or spinal cord during the advancement or insertion of the electrodes.
- Lead migration: Neurological damage can result when the leads (wires) move from their intended position.
- Mechanical damage/compression: Leads may cause direct trauma, compression on the neural tissue or inflammation, causing nerve damage.
- Overstimulation: Malfunctioning or improperly programmed devices can cause electric shock sensations or severe tingling or jolting sensations, and this may indicate nerve irritation.
- Infection/abscess: Infections at the implant site may lead to damage to nerves and surrounding tissue.
Symptoms of potential nerve damage include:
- Unexpected, sudden weakness in the arms or legs.
- New loss of sensation, tingling or numbness.
- Sudden electric shock sensation.
- Loss of bladder or bowel control.
Our law firm can help you recover financial compensation for medical bills, lost wages, pain, suffering and more if you have suffered nerve damage from an SCS device.
Can a Spinal Cord Stimulator Cause Bowel Problems?
Yes, a spinal cord stimulator can cause bowel problems by damaging nerves.
Call us today for a FREE consultation if you have experienced bowel problems after going through a spinal cord stimulator operation.
Can a Spinal Cord Stimulator Cause Paralysis?
Yes, spinal cord stimulator devices can cause partial or permanent paralysis.
Causes of paralysis include:
- Epidural hematomas: Bleeding which compresses the spinal cord, leading to damage.
- Electrode/lead migration: Electrodes or leads may puncture or compress the spinal cord if they migrate in the body.
- Electrode misplacement: Electrodes may puncture or compress the spinal cord if they are placed incorrectly.
- Infection: Insertion site infection may lead to severe neurological complications.
Symptoms to look out for include:
- Loss of bladder or bowel control
- Severe weakness, numbness or pain in legs or arms
- Abnormal electric shock, jolting or tingling sensations
Our law firm can help you recover financial compensation if you or a loved one has developed paralysis due to an SCS device.
Can You Have a Spinal Cord Stimulator Removed?
Yes, you can have a spinal cord stimulator if you are experiencing complications from it.
Complications from spinal cord stimulators may include hardware failure, device overheating and painful electrical shocks which may require additional surgery in order to correct.
Call us today for a FREE consultation if you require an SCS device removal surgery due to complications. You may be eligible for financial compensation in a lawsuit.
How Do They Remove a Spinal Cord Stimulator?
Spinal cord stimulator removal is a surgical procedure which is often done under general anesthesia.
The surgeon will remove the implantable pulse generator from the lower back or buttock and pull the leads out from the epidural space. This will usually take around an hour.
Recovery typically requires a few weeks. Most will return to normal activity within three weeks.
Call us today for a FREE consultation if you or a loved one are experiencing SCS device complications which have you considering or needing removal of the device. You may qualify for financial compensation in a lawsuit.
Is There a Spinal Cord Stimulator Class Action Lawsuit?
No.
Our law firm is, instead, filing individual lawsuits on behalf of those injured by SCS devices.
We are filing individual lawsuits instead of a class action lawsuit because we believe we can recover far more compensation for SCS device victims through individual lawsuits than through a class action lawsuit.
Are Spinal Cord Stimulators Being Recalled?
Yes.
The FDA has issued a minimum of 44 recalls for SCS devices.
Over 155,000 Abbott Infinity and Proclaim pulse generators were recalled in September 2023.
You can check if your device has been recalled at the FDA’s Medical Device Recalls page.
Can Your Body Reject a Spinal Cord Stimulator?
Yes, the body may reject a spinal cord stimulator. It is, however, rare.
You should see your healthcare provider as soon as possible if you are experiencing symptoms you believe may be caused by your body rejecting your SCS device. Those symptoms may be caused by your body rejecting the device, or they may be caused by a device defect.
Call us today for a FREE consultation if it turns out that your symptoms have been caused by a device defect.
Contact a Spinal Cord Stimulator Attorney
Call us today for a FREE consultation at (800) 718-4658 or contact us if you or a loved one developed a severe or serious injury because of an SCS device. We can help you recover compensation for medical bills, lost wages, pain, suffering and more and will charge you no legal fee until we win your case.
Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit Updates – 2026
August 19, 2026 Update
A lawsuit filed on August 11 in California by a Kentucky man alleges that the man was told his Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator would provide him with chronic pain relief, but the device instead caused permanent nerve damage and unexpected electric shocks.
The lawsuit names Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation and Boston Scientific Corporation as defendants.
The lawsuit alleges that the company’s spinal cord stimulators are “chronically dangerous and defective.” It claims Boston Scientific knew about these issues yet continued to aggressively market the stimulators while overstating their effectiveness and safety.
According to the lawsuit, the man had a stimulator implanted in 2017 for chronic pain treatment, only agreeing to this procedure after going through a trial period using a temporary model that provided him with pain relief.
However, it is indicated by the lawsuit that the permanent implant was substantially different from the temporary model, failing to provide similar results. Instead, the lawsuit claims the man experienced left shoulder pain and unexpected shocks, as well as a lack of pain relief.
He eventually needed the device removed by surgeons in December 2021, who allegedly told him they needed to leave some wires inside because they ended up fused to his bones via calcification.
The lawsuit claims the man has suffered permanent nerve damage, arguing the man’s injuries may have been avoided had Boston Scientific been transparent regarding the device’s actual risks, and had adequately manufactured, tested and designed the device.
August 12, 2026 Update
A lawsuit filed on July 30 in California by an Alabama woman alleges that a Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator created numerous serious complications and did not relieve her chronic pain.
The lawsuit names Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation and Boston Scientific Corporation as defendants.
The lawsuit alleges the plaintiff suffered from problems after receiving a spinal cord stimulator implant in October 2023, leaving her with pain that worsened and neurological symptoms which required an additional surgery to remove the device.
However, it is alleged that the removal failed to resolve her problems, and that she continues experiencing pain and additional symptoms worsened by or caused by the device.
The lawsuit states she received a Boston Scientific Model SC-1232 device in October 2023 for the treatment of chronic pain.
However, instead of providing pain relief, the implant allegedly caused the woman to develop electric shock sensations, leg numbness and worsening pain. She allegedly needed to start using a cane because of this, which she continues to need.
The lawsuit alleges that the bladder incontinence she’s been diagnosed with was caused by the device, and that she wasn’t warned that the device could cause it.
According to the lawsuit, the complications led to numerous meetings with a representative from Boston Scientific who characterized the complications as uncommon, assuring her that adjustments to the programming of the device would provide pain relief.
However, the reprogramming allegedly failed to provide pain relief, with the worsening symptoms continuing.
Ultimately, she allegedly needed surgery to remove the device, yet continues to suffer symptoms including pain because of the implant.
July 27, 2026 Update
A lawsuit filed on July 21 in Florida by a Florida man alleges that the man has suffered disabling, severe pain because Abbott Laboratories’ sales and customer service representatives made adjustments to his spinal cord stimulator implant without licenses or proper training.
The complaint lists Abbott Laboratories as well as the FDA as defendants.
The lawsuit alleges that the Abbott Proclaim system spinal cord stimulator the man had implanted for chronic pain was defectively designed, leading to painful symptoms that required revision surgery, as well as causing permanent injuries.
According to the complaint, the man had a Proclaim XR5 SCS system implanted in January 2021. The complaint alleges that the device suddenly stopped relieving pain in August 2024.
When the man reported the issue, according to the lawsuit, a sales representative with Abbott told him he would guide him through the process of reprogramming the device to make it effective again.
According to the lawsuit, two attempts to reprogram the device had no effect, and the third attempt caused the implant to start electrocuting the man.
The man’s daughter then found him on the floor, according to the complaint, spasming. The lawsuit contends he was in excruciating pain, writhing on the floor for several minutes, incapable of reaching the controller to shut the device off. His daughter allegedly found him on the floor and turned the device off while the sales rep apologized over the phone. The man allegedly continued to spasm after the device was turned off.
The lawsuit alleges the stimulator was set to 66, despite a normal daytime setting being 35 to 45 and a normal nighttime setting being 15 to 21. The man allegedly suffered from kidney and back pain in addition to constant diarrhea for two weeks afterward.
October 2024, according to the lawsuit, alleges that a different sales rep called the man to have his settings adjusted, meeting him at a clinic in Florida. This sales rep allegedly told him the device hadn’t been recalled until the man showed him paperwork indicating it had.
The sales rep then allegedly tried to reprogram the device without a doctor present, leaving the man spasming in pain on the floor once again.
The man then had the device surgically removed in April 2025, according to the lawsuit, which claims he still suffers chronic pain as well as new injuries caused by the stimulator.
July 19, 2026 Update
The judge who was recently assigned to the Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator MDL will have an initial meeting next month with lawyers in the litigation.
A June 23 pretrial order has asked all parties’ counsel to appear for a first scheduling conference on August 5. It has been indicated that this conference will address the appointment of the plaintiffs’ lead counsel as well as the leadership structure.
Several plaintiffs’ lawyers will be selected in order to serve in leadership roles in the MDL as well as represent all of the plaintiffs’ interests. This process is common in mass torts. It helps make sure that plaintiffs get represented consistently and channels key decisions and information through a small group of attorneys instead of every law firm involved around the country.
Two attorneys have been appointed to arrange the first status conferences. All plaintiffs’ counsel has been called to meet and confer by July 24 as well as propose a leadership structure, including positions like Liaison Counsel, Lead Counsel as well as a proposed Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee.
July 24 has been set as the deadline for applications for plaintiffs’ liaison and lead counsel positions.
The parties have been called to prepare a joint preliminary report by July 24. This report should be no longer than 25 pages.
The conference will cover outstanding motions, set a schedule of regular status conference, cover preliminary case management issues, and address other issues which require prompt resolution.
July 1, 2026 Update
Plaintiffs have filed a motion looking to consolidate Abbott Laboratories spinal cord stimulator claims before a single judge for coordinated pretrial proceedings and discovery.
The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation had declined to establish an MDL for all spinal cord stimulator lawsuits involving all brands earlier in June. This new motion indicates that spinal cord stimulator lawsuits specifically involving Abbott devices share common questions of law and fact, claiming Abbott knew about issues with the devices and withheld knowledge of the risks from medical professionals and patients in order to keep profits and sales high.
The motion is requesting that all Abbott spinal cord stimulator lawsuits which have been and will be filed in federal courts around the country be consolidated in California’s Central District.
The plaintiffs are arguing that consolidation would serve the convenience of the court, witnesses and parties, and would probably eliminate contradictory rulings as well as prevent duplicate discovery efforts.
The motion states that 15 Abbott spinal cord stimulator lawsuits have been filed, in addition to 12 substantially similar claims filed by 33 plaintiffs in six U.S. District Courts.
The motion notes that 10 of these lawsuits also name the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as a defendant. Some argue the FDA shouldn’t have ever approved the devices.
May 18, 2026 Update
A lawsuit filed on May 7 in Illinois by a Hawaiian woman alleges that she was misled about the effectiveness and safety of the Eterna spinal cord stimulator by Abbott’s sales representatives, claiming they wrongly programmed the device without having a medical license.
The lawsuit names Abbott Laboratories and the FDA as defendants.
The lawsuit alleges that the device has a defective design and was fraudulently marketed. It also claims the FDA failed to approve only safe medical devices by letting the device be approved without adequate testing.
The woman had the device implanted in December 2023 for chronic pain treatment, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit alleges that the initial pain relief the device provided soon ceased, being replaced with complications such as:
- Shocks
- Increased pain
- Numbness in the extremities
- Incontinence
- Difficulty walking
- Balance problems
May 8, 2026 Update
A lawsuit filed on April 24 in Ohio alleges that a Nevro spinal cord stimulator implant was defectively designed and prone to worsening pain, lead fractures, failure and other complications.
The lawsuit names Nevro as well as Globus Medical Inc. as defendants.
The lawsuit alleges the defective implant was managed and programmed by company representatives who did not have a license to perform medicine.
The lawsuit claims the man had a Nevro device implanted in July 2024 then had an identical device implanted on a separate part of his spine in January of 2025.
The complaint indicates that two Nevro sales reps were involved in the implantation and selection process as well as the device’s intraoperative programming.
The complaint claims that the man started experiencing the following less than one month after each device was placed inside of him:
- Disappearance of pain reduction benefits
- Weakness and numbness in the lower extremities
- Electric shocking sensations
- Burning pain
The lawsuit claims the man was assured numerous times by Nevro’s representatives that the issues were due to implant settings rather than device failure. The representatives then allegedly altered the devices’ programming to respond to the man’s complaints, sometimes without the presence of a treating physician.
The side effects and discomfort got worse the longer the devices were inside of the man, according to the lawsuit, which indicates that delays in removing the devices which were encouraged by the Nevro reps left him worse off than if the devices were removed more quickly. The lawsuit claims the man has suffered from permanent nerve damage.
May 1, 2026 Update
A lawsuit filed on April 22 in Florida by a Florida woman alleges that SCS devices that were implanted in her were altered after initial approval by the FDA, leading to device failures which injured her permanently.
The lawsuit names Boston Scientific Corporation, Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation and Abbott Laboratories as defendants.
The lawsuit alleges that manufacturers utilized pre-market approval supplements in order to change important aspects of the SCS devices, such as stimulation features, firmware and battery systems, without going through new safety review or clinical testing. The lawsuit claims that because of this, physicians and patients were deceived into thinking the implants were the same as the versions that were approved by regulators.
Because of this, the lawsuit claims the woman experienced multiple device malfunctions, electrical shocks and worsening pain, leading to the need for device removal surgery.
The lawsuit claims that device lead fragments remain embedded inside of her, preventing her from having needed MRI scans done and contributing to health complications that are long-term.
The lawsuit alleges she received a Boston Scientific implant in 2013 and later needed revision surgeries because of complications like lead migration.
She allegedly received an Abbott implant in 2021, yet claims it failed as well, leading to repeated malfunctions, ineffective pain relief and burning sensations before it was removed.
While the device was being removed, doctors allegedly found fractured leads in her pelvis and spine, leaving the woman unable to have MRI scans done to monitor multiple sclerosis.
April 25, 2026 Update
A federal judges’ panel will hear arguments starting in late May regarding if a growing number of lawsuits over spinal cord stimulators should get consolidated before one judge who would collectively move them through the pretrial phase.
The decision to centralize these claims or not follows 14 lawsuits being filed involving Abbott and Boston Scientific which are pending in five federal jurisdictions.
The claims raise similar allegations, alleging that the devices materially differ from originally approved versions because of modifications that were insufficiently tested, leading to dangerous performance problems. Plaintiffs are claiming the issues have led to complications like worsening symptoms, ineffective pain relief and electric shocks.
Plaintiffs filed a motion to transfer in the JPML in February, calling for all current as well as future federal Boston Scientific and Abbott defective spinal cord stimulator claims to get consolidated in Illinois’ Northern District.
Plaintiffs argue that consolidation would get rid of the risk of different judges issuing contradictory rulings while avoiding duplication of efforts like discovery. They also argued that putting all the lawsuits in a single location would serve the convenience of our court system, witnesses, plaintiffs and defendants.
The JPML, on April 16, issued a Notice of Hearing Session which indicated it will hear oral arguments regarding consolidation on May 28 in Milwaukee.
April 2, 2026 Update
On April 1, 2026, Medtronic won a spinal cord stimulator lawsuit where the Ninth Circuit ruled that a plaintiff couldn’t proceed because of lack of expert testimony which linked his injuries to the company’s conduct. This highlights the challenges that plaintiffs face when proving causation in these claims.
March 23, 2026 Update
A new lawsuit filed in Illinois is targeting Abbott as well as the Proclaim XR5 system.
Abbott’s sales representatives allegedly told the plaintiff prior to implantation that the device would provide pain relief which was long-term, was validated clinically, and would work just as well as or even better than a temporary trial stimulator.
The defective medical device lawsuit claims these promises ended up being false following the implant allegedly failing to provide relief that was lasting, instead leading to repeated complications and worsening pain.
The lawsuit claims that representatives with Abbott repeatedly programmed the device following surgery, without physician supervision at times, and later told the plaintiff by phone how to make adjustments herself.
The plaintiff is claiming that a lead was discovered to have migrated in June 2023, leading to revision surgery the next month. The plaintiff allegedly lost pain relief after this surgery, asking if the leads may have moved once again. Abbott’s representatives allegedly told her this could not have happened, yet a doctor, in September 2023, allegedly discovered that a lead had indeed migrated. The plaintiff claims the devices needed to be removed in March 2024 since the implanted spinal cord stimulator’s therapeutic efficacy had completely disappeared.
March 17, 2026 Update
A lawsuit filed on March 11 in Missouri by a Missouri man alleges that sales representatives with Boston Scientific failed to warn him about a risk of serious issues that could occur after he had a spinal cord stimulator implanted.
The lawsuit names Boston Scientific Corporation and the FDA as defendants. It alleges that Boston Scientific made misleading statements while providing inadequate warnings about spinal cord stimulator complications.
The lawsuit alleges the man had a Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator system implanted in February 2019 in order to manage chronic pain.
The lawsuit claims the man required a revision surgery in order to relocate a battery because of pain he felt at the location of the implant in June 2020. The lawsuit claims that, in June 2023, the man started to experience electric shocks and burning from the device’s leads, pain relief diminished, and that he no longer experiences pain relief from the spinal cord stimulator device.
February 28, 2026 Update
A Michigan federal judge ended up dismissing a WaveWriter spinal cord stimulator case filed against Boston Scientific on February 27, 2026. The judge ruled that the claims were preempted under the Medical Device Amendments and the FDCA because of the device’s FDA Premarket Approval status.
February 21, 2026 Update
On February 20, 2026, a motion got filed via the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in order to consolidate lawsuits which involve Boston Scientific and Abbott spinal cord stimulators into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Illinois’ Northern District. It cites shared legal and factual questions about regulatory compliance and device design and will allow for coordinated pretrial proceedings.
The motion claims that a minimum of 15 spinal cord stimulation device lawsuits are pending in five federal jurisdictions. Lawyers indicate that hundreds of other injured patients have already hired attorneys. This signals that the spinal cord stimulator injury litigation may significantly expand in the near future.
The motion is arguing that these devices have evolved into devices that are materially different from the original devices without needing to go through the regulatory scrutiny that brand-new devices have to go through.
January 27, 2026 Update
A lawsuit filed on December 11 in Illinois by a Texas woman alleges the woman needed additional spinal cord stimulator surgery to have the device removed following its failure.
The lawsuit names spinal cord stimulator manufacturer Abbott Laboratories as a defendant, arguing that the system was never approved by federal regulators.
The lawsuit also alleges that sales representatives with Abbott made changes and alterations to the device’s functions without proper approval or training.
The lawsuit alleges the woman had an Abbott Eterna stimulator implanted in October 2023 to treat chronic pain. The lawsuit claims that sales representatives indicated they reprogrammed the stimulator in order to make adjustments that were therapeutic.
The lawsuit claims that none of these sales representatives had medical training or were physicians.
Surgeons needed to remove the device in December 2023, according to the lawsuit, after finding that the implanted device’s leads had moved out of position.
October 18, 2025 Update
A lawsuit was filed in California against the FDA and Boston Scientific over a Spectra WaveWriter permanent spinal cord stimulator.
The lawsuit claims that lead migration as well as subsequent complications such as cardiac arrhythmia happened due to substantial device modifications which wrongly used an FDA PMA supplement pathway rather than requiring a full review.
The spinal cord stimulation system plaintiff is seeking a jury trial and damages.
