Not legal advice. LawsuitSettlementEstimator.com provides informational estimates only. Nothing on this site creates an attorney-client relationship.

GLP-1 drug litigation

Ozempic lawsuit: where the Wegovy, Mounjaro, Zepbound and GLP-1 cases stand

Two federal multidistrict litigations over GLP-1 drugs are pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. This page sets out what the court orders, the regulators and the drug labels say, as read on September 25, 2026, September 26, 2026, September 27, 2026 and November 8, 2026, and what nobody can tell you yet, including what a claim is worth.

Sources read
September 25, 2026, September 26, 2026, September 27, 2026 and November 8, 2026
Court
E.D. Pennsylvania
Settlements on record
None found
Case checker

Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro and Zepbound lawsuit checker: does the court text name your drug and injury?

Pick the drug you took and the injury a doctor diagnosed. The answer comes only from the words of the court text quoted on this page, with each document's date. It does not decide whether you could bring a claim, and it does not put a value on one.

Choose a drug and an injury to see what the court orders say about them.

This result is for informational and planning purposes only. It is not legal advice, financial advice, or a guarantee of any outcome. Every case is different. Consult a licensed attorney in your state for advice specific to your situation.

What your documented losses add up to

If you are getting ready to speak to a lawyer, you can add up the costs you have records for. This totals what you enter and nothing more. It is not what a claim is worth, and nothing on this page estimates that.

Enter amounts in US dollars. Leave a line blank if it does not apply.

Total of what you enteredNothing entered yet.

No multiplier, range or deduction is applied to this total, and your entries are not sent anywhere. Bring the records behind each line to your consultation.

The litigation

Where the Ozempic and GLP-1 lawsuits stand: the two federal MDLs

Two MDLs, one court, one judge. Each was created by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, which gathers lawsuits pending in different districts before a single judge.

Federal lawsuits over GLP-1 drugs are grouped into two multidistrict litigations, or MDLs, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. An MDL is not a trial. The Panel's orders send the cases to one judge for the shared work that comes before any trial, in the words of its December 15, 2025 order: “assigned to the Honorable Karen S. Marston for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.”

MDL No. 3094 is the stomach and bowel case. The Panel created it on February 2, 2024, finding that “Each lawsuit contains substantially similar allegations about GLP-1 RAs (specifically, Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus, Trulicity, and/or Mounjaro) and their alleged propensity to cause gastrointestinal injuries.” Among the questions it said every case shares is “whether defendants knew or should have known that their GLP-1 RA products can cause gastroparesis and other gastrointestinal injuries”.

The plaintiffs who asked for the MDL described the injuries more widely: “Movants seek to centralize actions involving plaintiffs who used any of these GLP-1 RA medications and in which plaintiffs suffered gastroparesis, ileus, intestinal obstruction or pseudo-obstruction, or other gastrointestinal injury.” That is their request, not the Panel's finding. The court's later orders, listed below, describe the injuries in their own words.

The Panel has since been asked to widen MDL No. 3094 twice, and ruled on both requests on December 12, 2024. It added a drug: “Expanding MDL No. 3094 to include the additional Novo Nordisk GLP-1 RA drug Saxenda will facilitate a uniform and efficient pretrial approach to this litigation”. The other request was for more injuries: “Plaintiff in Craig seeks to expand the scope of this MDL to include additional injuries, specifically, venous thromboembolism, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism (collectively, DVT injuries).” The Panel said no: “Further expansion of MDL No. 3094 to include claims for new types of injuries would significantly complicate the management of this litigation.” “Plaintiff has not demonstrated that the potential efficiency and convenience benefits of adding claims for DVT injuries to this MDL outweigh the increased managerial complexity that the addition of such claims is likely to create.”

The drug makers dispute all of it. The court's own page for MDL No. 3094, read on September 25, 2026, says: “The Novo Nordisk defendants and Eli Lilly and Company deny these allegations.”

Novo Nordisk, one of the two drug makers, describes the lawsuits in its own words in its annual report for 2025, filed with the SEC: “Novo Nordisk, along with Eli Lilly, are defendants in numerous product liability lawsuits (mainly in in [sic] the US) related to the use of GLP-1-based medicines.” “The US lawsuits are pending in various federal and state courts, with many matters having been consolidated in two multi-district litigations in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.” “Novo Nordisk does not expect these matters to have a material impact on Novo Nordisk’s financial position, operating profit or cash flow.” Those are the company's statements about itself, quoted as it wrote them; the doubled word is in the report, and [sic] marks it.

On August 15, 2025, the court ruled on the drug makers' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' shared complaint. Its order reads: “Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 329) is DENIED IN PART AND GRANTED IN PART”. “The motion is DENIED as to Counts III, IV, and XIV.” “The motion is GRANTED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND as to Counts VI, VII, XI, XII, XIII, Plaintiffs’ PLA claims, and Plaintiffs’ request for medical monitoring.” It also says: “Plaintiffs may file an amended master complaint if they can in good faith cure the deficiencies identified in the accompanying Memorandum.” The counts are the numbered claims in that complaint. A ruling on a motion to dismiss decides whether a claim, as the complaint states it, may go forward; it is not a finding about whether any drug caused anyone's injury.

The 2024 order closes with the stomach and bowel cases “assigned to the Honorable Gene E. K. Pratter for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.” By the time the Panel created the second MDL, on December 15, 2025, its order recorded that “Products liability litigation arising from the same drugs is pending in that district before Judge Karen S. Marston in MDL No. 3094.” Judge Karen S. Marston presides over both MDLs.

MDL No. 3163 is the vision case. It was created on December 15, 2025 for claims about non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy, or NAION: “Plaintiffs allege that their use of Eli Lilly’s or Novo Nordisk’s GLP-1 RA drugs (specifically, Ozempic, Wegovy, Saxenda, and Trulicity) caused them to suffer from non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION).” The Panel kept these cases apart from the stomach and bowel MDL, saying “we decline Eli Lilly’s suggestion that the NAION litigation be incorporated into MDL No. 3094”, and described the claims this way: “Plaintiffs bring substantially identical claims for failure to warn, design defect, and breach of warranties.”

The vision MDL is defined by the injury, and the same order shows it by keeping one lawsuit out: “Plaintiff in the Garcia action, No. 2:25-cv-04537, listed on Schedule B has amended his complaint to eliminate allegations that he suffers from vision loss and now alleges only gastrointestinal injuries. The action thus is not appropriate for inclusion in this MDL.”

The court's page for the vision MDL puts the two side by side: “This is the second MDL involving personal injury actions stemming from the use of GLP-1 RAs. The related MDL (MDL No. 3094) is also pending before Judge Marston. While the actions in this MDL allege that Plaintiffs suffer from NAION, the actions in MDL No. 3094 allege gastrointestinal injuries.”

The Panel's statistics report dated November 2, 2026 lists 4,082 actions pending in MDL No. 3094 and 278 pending in MDL No. 3163 as of November 2, 2026.

Those numbers count lawsuits on a court docket. They are not a count of people injured or of people who lost vision, and they say nothing about how any case will end.

Both MDLs started far smaller. The order of February 2, 2024 found that “This litigation consists of eighteen actions pending in eleven districts, as listed on Schedule A.” The order of December 15, 2025 found that “The litigation consists of 21 actions pending in three districts”.

February 2, 2024: transfer order, MDL No. 3094
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation gathers the gastrointestinal injury cases in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
July 14, 2024: Case Management Orders No. 12 and No. 14, MDL No. 3094
The first sets out the Plaintiff Fact Sheet and attaches the July 2024 form; the second lets cases be filed directly in the MDL court. What each says is set out below, in the sections on what a claim involves and on deadlines.
October 25, 2024: Case Management Order No. 20, MDL No. 3094
In a footnote, the court records what the parties agree one of the early science questions, Issue 3, will cover: “They also agree that Issue 3 will consider general causation for gastroparesis, ileus, small bowel obstruction, gallbladder injuries”. Deep vein thrombosis is mentioned only “if added to this MDL by the JPML”. The Panel later refused to add it; see the next entry.
December 12, 2024: two Panel orders, MDL No. 3094
One adds Saxenda. The other, an Order Denying Transfer, refuses to add the injuries one plaintiff asked for, and ends: “Accordingly, transfer of Craig is not warranted.”
March 21, 2025: Case Management Order No. 25, MDL No. 3094
A coordination order that also states the MDL's scope by class of drug: “The scope of the MDL includes glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and GLP-1/glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) dual receptor agonists (collectively, “GLP-1 RAs”) and plaintiffs who used GLP-1 RAs and suffered the injuries alleged in the operative Master Complaint.”
August 15, 2025: rulings on the Master Complaint and on gastroparesis, MDL No. 3094
A memorandum that lists the drugs at issue, an order on the motion to dismiss, and an order setting what a gastroparesis diagnosis must rest on. Each is quoted above or below, in its own words.
October 3, 2025: Case Management Order No. 27, MDL No. 3094
Sets how each case is pleaded: “For each action in this MDL, the Master Complaint together with the Short Form Complaint shall be deemed the Plaintiff’s operative Complaint.” It enters the Short Form Complaint each plaintiff files, with its lists of products and injuries.
December 15, 2025: transfer order, MDL No. 3163
Creates the separate vision MDL and assigns it to the judge already handling the stomach and bowel cases.
January 29, 2026: Case Management Order No. 4, MDL No. 3163
Lets vision cases be filed directly in the MDL court, on the same terms about choice of law as the stomach and bowel MDL.
March 16, 2026: Case Management Order No. 6, MDL No. 3163
Schedules a Science Day, an objective overview of the medicine and the science for the court: “the Court will hold a Science Day, on June 2, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 16B”.
April 30, 2026: Amended Case Management Order No. 12, MDL No. 3094
Governs the Plaintiff Fact Sheet each plaintiff must provide: “The obligation to provide a Plaintiff Fact Sheet (“PFS”) and related documents shall fall solely to Plaintiffs and the individual counsel of record representing a given Plaintiff under this Order.”
July 2, 2026: Case Management Order No. 12, MDL No. 3163
Names the seven brands in the vision MDL: the drugs are “sold under the brand names Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus, Saxenda, Trulicity, Mounjaro, and Zepbound.”
August 28, 2026: order setting the Rule 702 hearing, MDL No. 3094
Sets the evidentiary hearing on expert evidence for Cross Cutting Issues 2 and 3 for the week of September 14, 2026.
Regulators

Ozempic, NAION and vision loss: what regulators have said

The clearest regulatory finding on NAION comes from Europe. It is a narrow finding, so it is quoted here in the agency's own words.

On June 6, 2025, the European Medicines Agency announced that its safety committee, known as PRAC, had finished a review of semaglutide, the active substance in certain medicines “(namely Ozempic, Rybelsus and Wegovy)”. It concluded: “PRAC has concluded that NAION is a very rare side effect of semaglutide (meaning it may affect up to 1 in 10,000 people taking semaglutide).”

The agency describes NAION as “non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), an eye condition that may cause loss of vision”. It gives the size of the risk two ways. First, “Results from several large epidemiological studies suggest that exposure to semaglutide in adults with type 2 diabetes is associated with an approximately two-fold increase in the risk of developing NAION compared with people not taking the medicine.” Second, “This corresponds to approximately one additional case of NAION per 10,000 person-years of treatment”.

On the trials it adds: “Data from clinical trials also point to a slightly higher risk of developing the condition in people taking semaglutide, compared with people taking placebo (a dummy treatment).” And it acted on the finding: “EMA has therefore recommended that the product information for semaglutide medicines is updated to include NAION as a side effect with a frequency of ‘very rare’.”

For anyone taking the medicine now, the agency's practical advice is this: “If patients experience a sudden loss of vision or rapidly worsening eyesight during treatment with semaglutide, they should contact their doctor without delay.”

Read closely, that is a conclusion that NAION is a very rare side effect of semaglutide, reached by a European regulator about semaglutide medicines. It does not say that GLP-1 drugs commonly damage eyesight, and it was not a review of every drug in the class.

The announcement is dated June 6, 2025, and the page says: “This news announcement was revised on 13 June 2025 to delete the reference to the European Commission issuing a legally binding decision on the procedure.”

We looked for a U.S. Food and Drug Administration safety communication reaching the same conclusion about NAION and did not find one in the FDA material read for this page. That is not proof that none exists. What the U.S. labels say is set out below.

The research

What the studies of semaglutide, GLP-1 drugs and NAION found

Two published studies are set out here, and they point in different directions. Neither is a court finding, and neither decides any lawsuit.

The larger one is a registry study from Denmark, published in the International Journal of Retina and Vitreous on December 18, 2024. Its method, in its own words: “In a five-year longitudinal cohort study, we identified all persons with T2D in Denmark (n = 424,152) between 2018 and 2024.” It then compared two groups: “Patients were stratified according to exposure (n = 106,454) or non-exposure (n = 317,698) to once-weekly semaglutide”.

What it found: “During 1,915,120 person-years of observation, 218 persons developed NAION.” People taking semaglutide had the higher rate (“Semaglutide exposure was associated with a higher incidence rate (0·228 vs. 0·093 per 1000 person-years, p < 0·001)”), and exposure “independently predicted a higher risk of upcoming NAION (HR 2·19, 95% confidence interval 1·54 - 3·12)”. The paper's own tally: “Overall, 67 persons exposed to semaglutide developed NAION”.

The authors conclude that “use of once-weekly semaglutide independently more than doubled the risk of NAION”, and their declarations say: “Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.” It is an observational study, so what it reports is an association between the drug and NAION in the people it followed.

The second study pooled placebo-controlled trials of the manufacturer's own products. Published online in the British Journal of Ophthalmology on April 28, 2026, it describes itself as a “Pooled safety evaluation of NAION incidence from completed phase II, III and IV randomised placebo-controlled trials that evaluated the six Novo Nordisk-manufactured GLP-1RA products (active ingredients: liraglutide and semaglutide)”. It was co-authored by employees of Novo Nordisk, the maker of the drugs it studied. Its conflict-of-interest statement reads: “DAK and MS are employees of Novo Nordisk and hold stock in Novo Nordisk.” It also reads: “CR is an employee of Novo Nordisk.” Two of the author affiliations it lists are “Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.” and “Novo Nordisk India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore, India.”

Its size: “This pooled analysis included 96 829 participants (GLP-1RA-treated: n=64 917; placebo-treated: n=31 912) with 205 777 participant-years of observation”. Across those trials, “three confirmed NAION cases were identified in three GLP-1RA-treated participants and five confirmed cases were identified in four placebo-treated participants”. Its conclusion: “Data from randomised placebo-controlled trials with semaglutide and liraglutide do not show an increased incidence of NAION in participants receiving GLP-1RA treatment versus those receiving placebo”. That study, too, was co-authored by employees of Novo Nordisk.

So the two studies disagree. The Danish registry study found a higher rate among people taking semaglutide; the pooled trials of the manufacturer's own products, analysed by a team that included employees of Novo Nordisk, did not. The European regulator, weighing the evidence as a whole, still concluded that NAION is a very rare side effect of semaglutide. Anyone deciding what to make of that should know all three.

U.S. labels

What the U.S. labels for Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro and the other GLP-1 drugs say

These are the current U.S. prescribing labels for seven of the eight brands the court text names, as read on DailyMed on September 25, 2026. Each is dated by its own revision line. Victoza's label was not read for this section; the section on other injuries below reads it.

Every one of the seven has a warning headed Severe Gastrointestinal Adverse Reactions, and every one says the drug is not recommended in patients with severe gastroparesis. Every one also lists “ileus, intestinal obstruction, severe constipation including fecal impaction” among the reports received after approval, in section 6.2, Postmarketing Experience.

None of the seven contains the word NAION, or the phrases optic neuropathy or ischemic optic, in the versions read on September 25, 2026. The eye warning six of them carry is about diabetic retinopathy, which the labels name as its own condition. So a U.S. label is not where the NAION question has been answered.

A label can change, and DailyMed replaces the old version when it does. These are the versions posted that day; a later one may say something different.

Ozempic (semaglutide), label revised 5/2026
Section 5.7, Severe Gastrointestinal Adverse Reactions: “OZEMPIC is not recommended in patients with severe gastroparesis.” Section 5.3 is headed Diabetic Retinopathy Complications. The word NAION does not appear.
Wegovy (semaglutide), label revised 6/2026
Section 5.6, Severe Gastrointestinal Adverse Reactions: “WEGOVY is not recommended in patients with severe gastroparesis.” Section 5.8 is headed Diabetic Retinopathy Complications in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes. The word NAION does not appear.
Rybelsus (semaglutide), label revised 1/2026
Section 5.6, Severe Gastrointestinal Adverse Reactions: “RYBELSUS and OZEMPIC tablets are not recommended in patients with severe gastroparesis.” Section 5.3 is headed Diabetic Retinopathy Complications. The word NAION does not appear.
Saxenda (liraglutide), label revised 6/2026
Section 5.7, Severe Gastrointestinal Adverse Reactions: “SAXENDA is not recommended in patients with severe gastroparesis.” The label has no diabetic retinopathy section. The word NAION does not appear.
Trulicity (dulaglutide), label revised 3/2026
Section 5.6, Severe Gastrointestinal Adverse Reactions: “TRULICITY is not recommended in patients with severe gastroparesis.” Section 5.7 is headed Diabetic Retinopathy Complications in Patients with a History of Diabetic Retinopathy. The word NAION does not appear.
Mounjaro (tirzepatide), label revised 8/2026
Section 5.6, Severe Gastrointestinal Adverse Reactions: “MOUNJARO is not recommended in patients with severe gastroparesis.” Section 5.7 is headed Diabetic Retinopathy Complications in Patients with a History of Diabetic Retinopathy. The word NAION does not appear.
Zepbound (tirzepatide), label revised 8/2026
Section 5.2, Severe Gastrointestinal Adverse Reactions: “ZEPBOUND is not recommended in patients with severe gastroparesis.” Section 5.8 is headed Diabetic Retinopathy Complications in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. The word NAION does not appear.
Other injuries

Ozempic muscle loss, pancreatitis and other injuries: what the labels, regulators and court say

Readers ask about more than the stomach, bowel and eye injuries the lawsuits are about. For seven of them, this section sets out what the U.S. labels say and in which section, what the FDA and the European Medicines Agency have said and when, and whether the court has named the injury, and in what words. Where nothing was found, it says where the search was made.

The U.S. labels are the current prescribing labels for the eight brands the court text names, read on DailyMed on September 27, 2026, each dated by its own revision line: Ozempic (revised 5/2026), Rybelsus (revised 1/2026), Wegovy (revised 6/2026), Victoza (revised 10/2025), Saxenda (revised 6/2026), Trulicity (revised 3/2026), Mounjaro (revised 8/2026) and Zepbound (revised 8/2026).

The European product information is the version each of the European Medicines Agency's pages dated as last updated when read: Ozempic (August 25, 2026), Wegovy (September 21, 2026), Rybelsus (April 22, 2026), Victoza (February 20, 2025), Saxenda (July 31, 2025), Trulicity (January 30, 2026) and Mounjaro (September 21, 2026).

At the FDA, this page read the 23 quarterly lists of potential safety signals linked from its Adverse Event Monitoring System page, seven of which have a row for GLP-1 drugs, and its list of Drug Safety Communications, two of which are about GLP-1 drugs, both on suicidal thoughts.

None of what follows is a finding that any drug caused anyone's injury, and none of it is medical advice. Questions about a medicine are for the doctor who prescribed it.

Ozempic muscle loss: what the labels, regulators and court say

No U.S. label, FDA page or European product information read for this page lists muscle loss, lean-mass loss or sarcopenia as a side effect, an adverse reaction or a warning for any of these drugs.

Two U.S. labels mention lean mass, and both do it in section 12.2, headed Pharmacodynamics, which sits under the label's clinical pharmacology and not under its warnings or its adverse reactions. Wegovy's reads: “Semaglutide lowers body weight with greater fat mass loss than lean mass loss.” Zepbound's reads: “Tirzepatide lowers body weight with greater fat mass loss than lean mass loss.”

The other six labels (Ozempic, Rybelsus, Victoza, Saxenda, Trulicity and Mounjaro) do not contain the words lean mass or sarcopenia, and the only place any of them uses the word muscle is in the injection instructions, which say not to inject into one.

In Europe, the product information for Wegovy and Mounjaro describes body composition in section 5.1 of each, Pharmacodynamic properties, as a result measured in a clinical trial. Wegovy's: “The results of the DEXA assessment showed that treatment with semaglutide was accompanied by greater reduction in fat mass than in lean body mass leading to an improvement in body composition compared to placebo after 68 weeks.” Mounjaro's: “The results of the DEXA assessment showed that treatment with tirzepatide was accompanied by greater reduction in fat mass than in lean body mass leading to an improvement in body composition compared to placebo after 72 weeks.” Both sentences report what a trial measured across its participants. Neither says how much lean mass any one person loses, and nothing on this page estimates that.

At the FDA, none of the 23 quarterly lists of potential safety signals read for this page has a row for GLP-1 drugs about muscle or lean mass, and none of the Drug Safety Communications on the FDA's list is about it.

The court's words on the subject describe what the plaintiffs allege. Its memorandum of August 15, 2025 in MDL No. 3094 introduces the plaintiffs' list this way: “They allege GLP-1 RAs can and have caused a “myriad of injuries” including:” Among the items is “Micronutrient disease, which can lead to muscle wasting and Wernicke’s Encephalopathy”. The court then says: “For ease of reference, the Court refers to these injuries collectively as the “Alleged Injuries.”” That is the court describing what the plaintiffs claim, not a finding about what any drug does.

Ozempic pancreatitis: the label warning, the FDA and the court

All eight U.S. labels carry a warning headed Acute Pancreatitis: section 5.2 in Ozempic, Rybelsus, Wegovy, Victoza, Saxenda, Trulicity and Mounjaro, and section 5.5 in Zepbound.

Ozempic's opens: “Acute pancreatitis, including fatal and non-fatal hemorrhagic or necrotizing pancreatitis, has been observed in patients treated with GLP-1 receptor agonists, including OZEMPIC”. Among the reports received after approval, in section 6.2, its label lists “acute pancreatitis and necrotizing pancreatitis, sometimes resulting in death”. Zepbound's label tells prescribers: “If pancreatitis is suspected, discontinue ZEPBOUND and initiate appropriate management.”

An FDA communication about pancreatitis dated March 14, 2013 is not about Ozempic, which it does not name. Its title: “FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA investigating reports of possible increased risk of pancreatitis and pre-cancerous findings of the pancreas from incretin mimetic drugs for type 2 diabetes”. It lists the drugs it covers: “Drugs in the incretin mimetic class include exenatide (Byetta, Bydureon), liraglutide (Victoza), sitagliptin (Januvia, Janumet, Janumet XR, Juvisync), saxagliptin (Onglyza, Kombiglyze XR), alogliptin (Nesina, Kazano, Oseni), and linagliptin (Tradjenta, Jentadueto).” Of the eight brands on this page, it names only Victoza. And it says: “FDA has not reached any new conclusions about safety risks with incretin mimetic drugs.”

The FDA no longer serves that communication at its address, which answered Page Not Found when checked on September 27, 2026. It was read from the Internet Archive's copy of the FDA's page dated December 24, 2024, which the sources below link to.

The European product information for Ozempic says, in section 4.4 on special warnings: “Acute pancreatitis has been observed with the use of GLP-1 receptor agonists. Patients should be informed of the characteristic symptoms of acute pancreatitis.”

In the lawsuits, necrotizing pancreatitis is among what the plaintiffs claim. The court's memorandum of August 15, 2025 says that “each Plaintiff claims they were prescribed one or more of the eight identified medications for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and/or chronic weight management and that as a result, they suffered gastrointestinal symptoms and/or injuries, such as “debilitating cyclical vomiting,” gastroparesis, ileus, intestinal obstruction, gallbladder injury, vitamin deficiency, Wernicke’s Encephalopathy, ischemic bowel, and necrotizing pancreatitis.” The Short Form Complaint the court entered with Case Management Order No. 27 lists “Necrotizing Pancreatitis” among the injuries a plaintiff may check, and the checker above answers for it.

Kidney injury: a label warning tied to dehydration

All eight U.S. labels carry a warning headed Acute Kidney Injury Due to Volume Depletion: section 5.5 in Rybelsus, Wegovy, Victoza, Trulicity and Mounjaro, section 5.6 in Ozempic and Saxenda, and section 5.3 in Zepbound.

Ozempic's section 5.6 reads “There have been postmarketing reports of acute kidney injury, in some cases requiring hemodialysis, in patients treated with semaglutide.” and goes on: “The majority of the reported events occurred in patients who experienced gastrointestinal reactions leading to dehydration such as nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea”.

The European product information for Ozempic makes the same link in section 4.4, warning that “nausea, vomiting, and diarrhoea may cause dehydration, which in rare cases can lead to a deterioration of renal function”.

Beyond the labels' warning about dehydration, the FDA material read for this page adds nothing on the kidneys: none of the 23 quarterly signal lists has a row for GLP-1 drugs about them, and none of the Drug Safety Communications on the FDA's list is about them.

Kidney injury is not on the court's list of alleged injuries in its memorandum of August 15, 2025; the July 2024 fact sheet lists “Acute Kidney Injury” among the injuries a plaintiff may report, without the labels' link to dehydration, and a form is not a ruling on what an MDL covers.

Aspiration during anesthesia or sedation

All eight U.S. labels carry a warning headed Pulmonary Aspiration During General Anesthesia or Deep Sedation: section 5.9 in Rybelsus, Victoza, Saxenda, Trulicity, Mounjaro and Zepbound, and section 5.10 in Ozempic and Wegovy.

Ozempic's reads: “There have been rare postmarketing reports of pulmonary aspiration in patients receiving GLP-1 receptor agonists undergoing elective surgeries or procedures requiring general anesthesia or deep sedation who had residual gastric contents despite reported adherence to preoperative fasting recommendations.” On what could be done about it, the label says: “Available data are insufficient to inform recommendations to mitigate the risk of pulmonary aspiration during general anesthesia or deep sedation in patients taking OZEMPIC, including whether modifying preoperative fasting recommendations or temporarily discontinuing OZEMPIC could reduce the incidence of retained gastric contents.” And it tells prescribers: “Instruct patients to inform healthcare providers prior to any planned surgeries or procedures if they are taking OZEMPIC.”

So the label sets no timetable for a procedure. It says the data are not enough to know whether changing the fasting rules, or the medicine, would help.

The FDA's quarterly signal list for July to September 2023, which reads “Content current as of: 04/02/2026”, records for GLP-1 drugs: “The “Warnings and Precautions”, “Adverse Reactions”, and “Patient Counseling Information” sections of the labeling were updated between October 2024 and November 2024 to include information about aspiration during general anesthesia or deep sedation.” It adds: “FDA required a postmarketing requirement (PMR) trial in November 2024 to measure the effects of temporary withholding of GLP-1 receptor agonists and fasting duration on retained gastric contents to evaluate delayed gastric emptying  associated with GLP-1 receptor agonist use and inform potential recommendations to mitigate the serious risk of pulmonary aspiration.”

The European Medicines Agency's safety committee reported on July 12, 2024: “The committee could not establish a causal association between GLP-1 analogues and aspiration, but because of the known action of delayed gastric emptying and the presence of clinical trial cases and post marketing cases, the PRAC considered that healthcare professionals and patients should be informed on this potential consequence of delayed gastric emptying.” It said the product information would carry “a warning to patients that they should inform the doctor involved if they take these medicines and are scheduled to undergo surgery under anaesthesia or deep sedation”.

In the lawsuits, the court's memorandum of August 15, 2025 lists “Intraoperative aspiration” among the injuries the plaintiffs allege, and the Short Form Complaint lists “Aspiration”. Questions about a medicine before a procedure are for the doctor who prescribed it and the team doing the procedure.

Suicidal thoughts: the FDA asked for the warning to be removed

In a Drug Safety Communication its page dates 01-13-2026, the FDA said: “FDA is requesting that drug application holders remove information regarding the risk of suicidal ideation and behavior (SI/B) from the labeling of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) medications that currently include such language.” “The affected products are Saxenda (liraglutide), Wegovy (semaglutide), and Zepbound (tirzepatide).” Its review, it said, “found no increased risk of SI/B associated with the use of GLP-1 RA medications.”

Wegovy, Saxenda and Zepbound each list Suicidal Behavior and Ideation under Recent Major Changes in their labels, marked “(Removed) 02/2026”. The other five labels (Ozempic, Rybelsus, Victoza, Trulicity and Mounjaro) do not contain the word suicidal.

The FDA's own pages give two dates for the earlier communication. The 2026 one opens: “This information is an update to the FDA Drug Safety Communication: Update on FDA’s ongoing evaluation of reports of suicidal thoughts or actions in patients taking a certain type of medicines approved for type 2 diabetes and obesity issued on January 30, 2024.” The page of that earlier communication, headed “Update on FDA’s ongoing evaluation of reports of suicidal thoughts or actions in patients taking a certain type of medicines approved for type 2 diabetes and obesity”, prints the date 01-11-2024. This page does not decide which date is right. That earlier communication said: “Our preliminary evaluation has not found evidence that use of these medicines causes suicidal thoughts or actions.”

One FDA page has not caught up. Its quarterly signal list for July to September 2023, which reads “Content current as of: 04/02/2026”, still shows, for GLP-1 drugs and suicidal ideation: “FDA is evaluating the need for regulatory action.”

In Europe, the EMA's safety committee announced on April 12, 2024: “The PRAC has concluded that the available evidence does not support a causal association between the Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1)”, which it named as “dulaglutide, exenatide, liraglutide, lixisenatide and semaglutide”, “and suicidal and self-injurious thoughts and actions.” The sentence is quoted in three parts, around its list of names. Those are five active substances. Tirzepatide, the active ingredient in Mounjaro and Zepbound, is not one of them and is not mentioned on the agency's page, so the conclusion says nothing about tirzepatide either way.

The European product information for the seven brands read does not contain the word suicidal, and the court's list of alleged injuries in its memorandum of August 15, 2025 does not include suicidal thoughts.

Blood clots: two cases the court stayed

No U.S. label read for this page mentions a blood clot, deep vein thrombosis, venous thromboembolism or pulmonary embolism, and none of the seven European product-information documents contains the words thrombosis or embolism. No label and no regulator read for this page names a clot as a risk of these drugs.

At the FDA, none of the 23 quarterly lists of potential safety signals read for this page has a row for GLP-1 drugs about clots or embolism, and none of the Drug Safety Communications on the FDA's list is about them.

The court has written about them in a footnote to its memorandum of October 17, 2024 in MDL No. 3094: “The Court has stayed two individual cases in which the plaintiffs allegedly suffered veinous thromboembolisms after using one of the identified GLP-1 RAs.” “The parties are currently seeking permission from the JPML to include these and similar cases in this MDL.” “At this time, however, the MDL is limited to cases alleging gastrointestinal injuries.” The spelling veinous is the court's.

Those are cases the court stayed, not cases in the MDL. The Panel later refused to add DVT injuries to MDL No. 3094, in its order of December 12, 2024: “Further expansion of MDL No. 3094 to include claims for new types of injuries would significantly complicate the management of this litigation.” “Accordingly, transfer of Craig is not warranted.”

Wernicke’s encephalopathy and vitamin deficiency: allegations only

No U.S. label read for this page mentions Wernicke’s encephalopathy, thiamine or a micronutrient deficiency, and none of the seven European product-information documents mentions Wernicke’s encephalopathy, thiamine or any vitamin.

At the FDA, none of the 23 quarterly lists of potential safety signals read for this page has a row for GLP-1 drugs about Wernicke’s encephalopathy or thiamine, and none of the Drug Safety Communications on the FDA's list is about it.

It appears in the court's words only as part of what the plaintiffs allege. The memorandum of August 15, 2025 says that “each Plaintiff claims they were prescribed one or more of the eight identified medications for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and/or chronic weight management and that as a result, they suffered gastrointestinal symptoms and/or injuries, such as “debilitating cyclical vomiting,” gastroparesis, ileus, intestinal obstruction, gallbladder injury, vitamin deficiency, Wernicke’s Encephalopathy, ischemic bowel, and necrotizing pancreatitis.” Its list of alleged injuries includes “Micronutrient disease, which can lead to muscle wasting and Wernicke’s Encephalopathy”, and a footnote describes the condition, quoting the plaintiffs' complaint: “Wernicke’s Encephalopathy is “a life-threatening degenerative brain disorder caused by the lack of vitamin B1,” also known as thiamine, “and is characterized by mental confusion, vision problems, coma, hypothermia, low blood pressure, and ataxia (or lack of muscle coordination).””

A second memorandum filed the same day, August 15, 2025, repeats that plaintiffs claim “they suffered gastrointestinal symptoms and/or injuries, such as “debilitating cyclical vomiting,” gastroparesis, ileus, intestinal obstruction, gallbladder injury, vitamin deficiency, Wernicke’s Encephalopathy, ischemic bowel, and necrotizing pancreatitis.” The Short Form Complaint lists “Wernicke’s encephalopathy” among the injuries a plaintiff may check.

Drugs and makers

Which GLP-1 drugs the court orders name: the semaglutide, liraglutide, dulaglutide and tirzepatide brands

In the stomach and bowel MDL, the court's memorandum of August 15, 2025 lists them: “Eight GLP-1 RA medications are at issue: Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus, Victoza and Saxenda, which are manufactured by Novo; and Trulicity, Mounjaro, and Zepbound, which are manufactured by Lilly.”

A footnote explains two that the Panel's transfer orders never named: “Although the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) has not identified Victoza and Zepbound by name when transferring cases to be part of this MDL, the parties agree that they are properly included in the Master Complaint and considered by the Court now.” “Victoza, like Saxenda, is merely a brand name for the drug liraglutide, and Zepbound, like Mounjaro, is merely a brand name for the drug, tirzepatide.” “Because Saxenda and Mounjaro are part of this MDL, Victoza and Zepbound are as well.”

The 2024 order that created the stomach and bowel MDL named five of them. It described “Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus, each of which contains semaglutide as the active molecule and which are manufactured by the Novo Nordisk defendants”, and “Trulicity (dulaglutide) and Mounjaro (tirzepatide), which are manufactured by Eli Lilly and Company.” Saxenda was added by the Panel on December 12, 2024.

The Short Form Complaint the court entered on October 3, 2025 asks each plaintiff to say which products they used, under the words “Plaintiff/Decedent used the following GLP-1 RA Product(s) for which claims are being asserted in this case (check all that apply)”, and lists “Ozempic (semaglutide)”, “Wegovy (semaglutide)”, “Rybelsus (oral semaglutide)”, “Victoza (liraglutide)”, “Saxenda (liraglutide)”, “Trulicity (dulaglutide)”, “Mounjaro (tirzepatide)” and “Zepbound (tirzepatide)”.

The order of July 2, 2026 in the vision MDL names seven brands. They are “sold under the brand names Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus, Saxenda, Trulicity, Mounjaro, and Zepbound.” It says who makes them: “Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus, and Saxenda are manufactured by the Novo Nordisk Defendants, and Trulicity, Mounjaro, and Zepbound are manufactured by the Eli Lilly Defendants.”

One change to know about, from the court's order of July 2, 2026: “Earlier this year, the Novo Nordisk Defendants stopped marketing the semaglutide pill under the brand name “Rybelsus,” and instead, began marketing it as the pill form of Ozempic or Wegovy, depending on the dosage.” The current label for the pill covers both names.

Compounded drugs appear only on the July 2024 fact sheet, which lists “Compounded semaglutide”, “Compounded tirzepatide” and “Compounded dulaglutide” among the medicines a plaintiff may have taken, and tells a plaintiff: “You must answer each question separately for each GLP-1 RA you have taken, including separately for compounded and branded products.” No order read for this page names a compounded drug, and a form is not a ruling on what an MDL covers.

Other medicines in the class are not named by brand in the court text quoted here. The court describes the stomach and bowel MDL's scope by drug class, as the checker above shows, and whether a particular medicine falls within it is a question for a lawyer.

Ozempic (semaglutide)
Active ingredient semaglutide, applicant NOVO, on its Drugs@FDA page (NDA 209637). Named in MDL No. 3094 and MDL No. 3163.
Wegovy (semaglutide)
Active ingredient semaglutide, applicant NOVO, on its Drugs@FDA page (NDA 215256). Named in MDL No. 3094 and MDL No. 3163.
Rybelsus (semaglutide)
Active ingredient semaglutide, applicant NOVO NORDISK INC, on its Drugs@FDA page (NDA 213182). Named in MDL No. 3094 and MDL No. 3163.
Victoza (liraglutide)
Active ingredient liraglutide, applicant NOVO NORDISK INC, on its Drugs@FDA page (NDA 022341). Named in MDL No. 3094.
Saxenda (liraglutide)
Active ingredient liraglutide, applicant NOVO, on its Drugs@FDA page (NDA 206321). Named in MDL No. 3094 and MDL No. 3163.
Trulicity (dulaglutide)
Active ingredient dulaglutide, applicant ELI LILLY AND CO, on its Drugs@FDA page (BLA 125469). Named in MDL No. 3094 and MDL No. 3163.
Mounjaro (tirzepatide)
Active ingredient tirzepatide, applicant ELI LILLY AND CO, on its Drugs@FDA page (NDA 215866). Named in MDL No. 3094 and MDL No. 3163.
Zepbound (tirzepatide)
Active ingredient tirzepatide, applicant ELI LILLY AND CO, on its Drugs@FDA page (NDA 217806). Named in MDL No. 3094 and MDL No. 3163.
What a claim involves

What an Ozempic or Mounjaro claim involves: the fact sheet, the records and the gastroparesis rule

None of the orders read for this page sets a minimum period of use or a date range that every claimant must meet, and this page does not supply one. One order does set a rule for one injury, gastroparesis, and the rest say how a case is put together.

The gastroparesis rule is in the court's order of August 15, 2025 in MDL No. 3094, on Cross Cutting Issue No. 1: “Any Plaintiff claiming to suffer (or have suffered) from gastroparesis, must show that their diagnosis is based on a properly performed gastric emptying study (scintigraphy, breath test, or WMC).” It is a rule about what a plaintiff claiming gastroparesis in that MDL must show. It says nothing about any other injury.

Each plaintiff provides a fact sheet. The court's amended order of April 30, 2026 says: “The obligation to provide a Plaintiff Fact Sheet (“PFS”) and related documents shall fall solely to Plaintiffs and the individual counsel of record representing a given Plaintiff under this Order.” It adds: “The form PFS that shall be used in MDL 3094 and all Member Actions is attached hereto as Exhibit A.” The court's own copy of that order ends at the judge's signature with no exhibit attached, so what the current form asks is not established here.

The form attached to the original order, filed July 14, 2024, is the July 2024 version, and it is what the list below comes from. Its injury section begins: “Please identify each and every injury for which you are suing and that you claim was caused or worsened by use of any GLP-1 RA”. Among the documents it asks a plaintiff for are these. The current form may ask for different ones.

Each case is pleaded on a shared complaint. The court's order of October 3, 2025 says: “For each action in this MDL, the Master Complaint together with the Short Form Complaint shall be deemed the Plaintiff’s operative Complaint.” The Short Form Complaint it entered lists the injuries a plaintiff may check, under the words “as a result of using GLP-1 RA Product(s), Plaintiff/Decedent suffered the following injuries, including their sequelae (check all that apply)”: “Gastroparesis”, “Other gastro-intestinal injuries (specify)”, “Ileus”, “Ischemic Bowel/Ischemic Colitis”, “Intestinal Obstruction”, “Necrotizing Pancreatitis”, “Gallbladder Injury (specify)”, “Micronutrient Deficiency”, “Wernicke’s encephalopathy”, “Aspiration”, “Death” and “Additional/Other(s) (specify)”.

In the vision MDL, the court's order of July 2, 2026 summarises what every plaintiff there claims: “each Plaintiff claims they were prescribed one or more of the identified drugs for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and/or long-term weight management and that as a result, they suffered NAION.”

Put together, the facts the orders turn on are the drug and the injury: which medicine was prescribed, and which condition a doctor diagnosed. Those are the facts a lawyer would need to see in your records, and the checker above shows which pairings the court text names.

Pharmacy records, July 2024 fact sheet
The form asks for “For [PRODUCTS], pharmacy records substantiating that you filled a prescription for that GLP-1 RA prior to the date of the alleged injury(ies)”.
Medical records of the injury, July 2024 fact sheet
The form asks for “Regarding the injury(ies)/condition(s) you contend were caused by GLP-1 RA(s), medical records evidencing or otherwise reflecting the injury(ies)/condition(s)”.
Proof of a gastroparesis diagnosis, July 2024 fact sheet
The form asks for “If you allege gastroparesis as an injury, medical records documenting proof of diagnosis, including any confirmatory testing”.
Prescriptions, July 2024 fact sheet
The form asks for “A copy of all prescriptions for [PRODUCTS]”.
Receipts, July 2024 fact sheet
The form asks for “Receipts for [PRODUCTS]”.
Photographs of the packaging, July 2024 fact sheet
The form asks for “Photographs of medicine containers, bottles, pens, vials or packaging related to GLP-1 RAs”.
Unused medicine, July 2024 fact sheet
The form asks for “Any unused GLP-1 RAs, including pens, containers, boxes, packaging, and/or labeling”.
Deadlines

Is there a deadline to file an Ozempic or GLP-1 lawsuit?

Yes. None of the MDL orders read for this page sets a filing deadline that applies to everyone. The time limit on a claim like this comes from the law of the state that governs it, and the tool below shows, for the state you pick, what the provisions read for this page say about it, with a date counted from one you enter.

The orders do say two things about time. For the stomach and bowel MDL, Case Management Order No. 27, filed October 3, 2025, sets the date a case counts as started: “For purposes of statutes of limitation and statutes of repose, a Plaintiff shall be deemed to have initiated his or her case as of the date of the filing of his or her original complaint or his or her Short Form Complaint, whichever was filed first.”

And both MDLs let a case be filed directly with the MDL court, by Case Management Order No. 14 in MDL No. 3094 (filed July 14, 2024) and Case Management Order No. 4 in MDL No. 3163 (filed January 29, 2026). Both orders say the same thing about it: “Filing an action directly in the MDL pursuant to this Order will not determine the applicable choice of law, including the choice of law for any of the claims in the action and for statute of limitation or repose purposes.” So filing there does not settle which state's deadline governs.

No order pausing, or tolling, these deadlines was found in the orders read for this page.

A deadline can run out while someone is still deciding what to do. Ask a licensed attorney in your state which deadline applies to you and when it started to run.

Time limits by state

Ozempic and GLP-1 claim time limits in your state: what the law read for this page says

Pick the state whose law you want to see and enter a date. The tool adds the period the provisions read for this page give to the date you enter, and shows those provisions in their own words: what they say about when the clock starts, any outer limit counted from a sale, and what could not be read. It is not your deadline, and it shows the law of the state you pick, which the orders above say filing in the MDL does not decide.

The tool adds the period to whatever date you enter. It does not decide when your time started; the provisions below say what they say about that.

Choose a state to see what the provisions read for this page say.

This result is for informational and planning purposes only. It is not legal advice, financial advice, or a guarantee of any outcome. Every case is different. Consult a licensed attorney in your state for advice specific to your situation.
Settlements and updates

Ozempic lawsuit settlements and updates: what no one can tell you yet

As of September 25, 2026, the court orders and court pages read for this page show no settlement, no verdict and no trial date in either MDL.

The latest step in the stomach and bowel MDL is a hearing on expert evidence. The court's page for MDL No. 3094, read on September 25, 2026, said: “From September 14, 2026 through September 18, 2026, Judge Marston is holding a Rule 702 evidentiary hearing ("Daubert" hearing) on Cross Cutting Issues 2 and 3.” No ruling from that hearing was on the court's list of orders that day.

The hearing is on Cross Cutting Issues 2 and 3. In its order of October 25, 2024, the court recorded the parties' agreement about the third: “They also agree that Issue 3 will consider general causation for gastroparesis, ileus, small bowel obstruction, gallbladder injuries”.

The vision MDL is at an earlier stage. Its court scheduled a Science Day by an order that reads “the Court will hold a Science Day, on June 2, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 16B”, and on July 2, 2026 it issued an order on early discovery and motions on cross cutting issues.

That is why this page gives no figure for what an Ozempic, Wegovy or Mounjaro claim is worth. There is no settlement or verdict in these MDLs to work from, and a number built without one would be a guess dressed up as an answer. The other calculators on this site apply a multiplier to a reader's own losses; that method has nothing to stand on here until the courts produce results.

When there is news, it will come from the court. The orders are posted on the Eastern District of Pennsylvania's MDL pages, and the Judicial Panel publishes its pending-case counts in its statistics reports.

Ozempic lawsuit FAQ

Sources

The documents this page is built on

Every date, count and quotation on this page comes from one of these, read on the date shown. Court orders are the court's own copies, or GovInfo's for the opinions the court's own site links there. The labels, the Drugs@FDA pages and the FDA and European Medicines Agency pages are the versions served that day. Novo Nordisk's annual report was read from a dated Internet Archive copy of the SEC's own file, and the FDA's 2013 communication on pancreatitis from a dated Internet Archive copy of the FDA's own page, which the FDA no longer serves.

Every document behind our product lawsuits figures, each linked with the date we last read it, is listed on our Product Lawsuits research sources page.