Hernia Mesh Settlement Amounts Settlement

Hernia mesh settlement amounts are not published as a single national figure. The public record for Bard hernia repair device claims consists mainly of case counts and liability language in Becton Dickinson and Company SEC filings, following its December 29, 2017 acquisition of C.R. Bard, Inc. Those filings describe settlement discussions and trials but do not disclose a per-case or total settlement dollar amount for the hernia claims.

At a glance

• As of December 31, 2017, Becton Dickinson was defending approximately 650 product liability claims involving Bard’s line of hernia repair devices, according to its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2017.
• That filing states the majority of those hernia claims were pending in a coordinated proceeding in Rhode Island State Court, with others in state and federal courts.
• The same filing states Becton Dickinson “engages in resolution discussions with plaintiffs’ law firms” regarding certain hernia claims but “intends to vigorously defend” claims that do not settle.
• The filing discloses no dollar amount for hernia claim settlements; the $121 million payment it reports concerns pelvic mesh (Women’s Health) claims and Medtronic, not hernia devices.
• The supplied documents identify no judicial opinion, verdict, or court-approved settlement resolving the hernia mesh claims as a class.

What the SEC filings actually disclose about hernia mesh claims

The most specific hernia disclosure in the supplied record is Note 5, “Contingencies,” in Becton Dickinson’s Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2017. Under the heading “Hernia Product Claims,” the company reports the approximate claim count and the courts involved. It also states that trials were scheduled throughout 2018 in various state and federal courts and that the company expected additional hernia trials over the next 12 months.

The filing describes the claims as seeking “damages for personal injury allegedly resulting from use of the products.” That wording is the company’s characterization: the injuries are alleged, not established by any ruling in the supplied documents.

The filing also addresses insurance and indemnity in general terms. It states that some settlements, judgments, and defense costs relating to product liability matters are or may be covered in whole or in part under product liability insurance policies, and that recoveries may be less than stated coverage limits or may not be available at all. It does not quantify hernia claim exposure.

Case counts: what the numbers can and cannot tell you

The approximately 650 figure is a claim count, not a settlement count. It appears in a periodic report and reflects the company’s information as of one date, December 31, 2017. Claim counts in later filings would be needed to describe how the number changed, and the supplied documents do not include a later hernia-specific count.

A claim count also does not reveal how many claims were resolved, how many were dismissed, or what any resolution paid. The filing notes that resolution discussions occur “from time to time” without stating outcomes.

For background on how these claims are organized, the site’s overview of hernia mesh litigation covers the broader claim structure, and the hernia mesh litigation case study examines how individual matters have been documented. A separate Covidien hernia mesh litigation page addresses claims involving a different manufacturer; those claims are distinct from the Bard matters discussed here and should not be combined into one figure.

What is established vs. what is alleged

Established by the supplied documents: Becton Dickinson completed its acquisition of C.R. Bard on December 29, 2017. As of December 31, 2017, the company was defending approximately 650 hernia product liability claims. Most were pending in a coordinated proceeding in Rhode Island State Court. Trials were scheduled throughout 2018. The company engaged in resolution discussions with plaintiffs’ law firms.

Alleged only: that the hernia repair devices caused personal injury. The filing attributes this to the claims themselves (“allegedly resulting from use of the products”). No supplied document contains a finding of liability, a verdict, or a court determination on the merits of any hernia claim.

Not disclosed anywhere in the supplied documents: a total settlement fund, an average per-claimant payment, or an allocation by device model.

Where the claims stand procedurally

No federal multidistrict litigation for Bard hernia mesh appears in the supplied documents. Multidistrict litigation (MDL) is a federal procedure that consolidates pretrial proceedings for related cases before one judge, coordinated by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML). The 2017 filing instead describes a coordinated proceeding in Rhode Island State Court as the main venue for the hernia claims, plus claims in other state and federal courts and one putative class action in the United States.

The supplied documents contain no JPML transfer order, no MDL docket number, and no bellwether trial result for hernia mesh. A bellwether trial is an early test case selected from a group of similar claims to gauge how juries respond. The filing’s only trial information is prospective: trials scheduled throughout 2018 and additional trials expected within 12 months.

For contrast, the same filing describes federal MDL consolidation for Bard pelvic mesh claims in the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, and for Bard inferior vena cava filter claims in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Those are separate product lines. Readers exploring the filter matters can consult the site’s IVC filter litigation overview, which is not part of the hernia record.

Why the $121 million figure is not a hernia settlement number

The Form 10-Q reports that Bard paid Medtronic $121 million “towards these potential settlements” in the Women’s Health Product Claims context, under a July 2015 agreement amended in June 2017. Those are pelvic mesh claims. The filing states the company believes the Women’s Health Product Claims are not the subject of Medtronic’s indemnification obligation, and it treats hernia claims in a separate subsection with no dollar figure attached.

Using the $121 million as a hernia mesh settlement amount would misattribute it. It concerns a different product line, a different counterparty, and a payment obligation rather than a resolved claimant payment.

Key dates

• December 29, 2017: Becton Dickinson completes its acquisition of C.R. Bard, assuming Bard’s product liability matters, including hernia claims.
• December 31, 2017: Measurement date for the approximately 650 hernia product liability claims reported in the Form 10-Q.
• Throughout 2018: Trials of hernia product liability claims scheduled in various state and federal courts, per the same filing.
• August 5, 2021: Becton Dickinson third fiscal quarter earnings release, which discusses surgical mesh portfolio growth and the Tepha acquisition but discloses no hernia settlement amount.
• May 1, 2025: Becton Dickinson second quarter fiscal 2025 release, noting FDA 510(k) clearance of the Phasix ST Umbilical Hernia Patch, a product announcement rather than a litigation development.

What this does not establish

The record does not establish any hernia mesh settlement amount. It does not show a class settlement, a court-approved settlement fund, a claims deadline, or a per-person payment.

It does not show liability. The filing’s injury language is framed as allegation, and no verdict or ruling on the merits appears in the supplied documents.

It does not show current claim volume. The approximately 650 count is dated December 31, 2017, and later hernia-specific counts are not in the supplied materials.

It does not show federal consolidation. No MDL number or JPML order for hernia mesh is present in the supplied documents.

Frequently asked questions

How much has been paid to settle hernia mesh claims?

The supplied SEC filings do not disclose a total or per-case dollar amount for Bard hernia mesh settlements. Becton Dickinson’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2017 states that the company engaged in resolution discussions with plaintiffs’ law firms regarding certain hernia claims but reports no figure. Any specific amount would need a document that states it.

How many hernia mesh claims were pending against Bard?

Becton Dickinson reported approximately 650 product liability claims involving Bard’s line of hernia repair devices as of December 31, 2017. That figure appears in Note 5 of the company’s Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2017. It is a claim count as of that date, not a settlement count.

Is there a federal MDL for Bard hernia mesh claims?

The supplied documents do not identify a federal MDL for Bard hernia mesh claims. The December 31, 2017 filing states that most hernia claims were pending in a coordinated proceeding in Rhode Island State Court, with others in state and federal courts. The same filing separately describes federal MDL consolidation for pelvic mesh and IVC filter claims.

Does the $121 million payment relate to hernia mesh?

No. The $121 million figure in the Form 10-Q concerns Women’s Health Product Claims (pelvic mesh) and a payment Bard made to Medtronic under a July 2015 agreement amended in June 2017. The hernia claims appear in a separate subsection of the same filing with no dollar amount stated.

Sources

1. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission: “EX-99.2, Becton Dickinson and Company / C.R. Bard, Inc. Investor Presentation” (link, accessed 2026-02-14)
2. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission: “EX-99.1, BD Announces Third Fiscal Quarter Results” (link, accessed 2026-02-14)
3. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission: “Form 10-Q, Becton, Dickinson and Company, quarterly period ended December 31, 2017” (link, accessed 2026-02-14)
4. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission: “EX-99.1, BD Reports Second Quarter Fiscal 2025 Financial Results” (link, accessed 2026-02-14)
5. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission: “Form 10-Q, Becton, Dickinson and Company, quarterly period ended December 31, 2018” (link, accessed 2026-02-14)
6. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission: “Form 10-Q, Becton, Dickinson and Company, quarterly period ended December 31, 2023” (link, accessed 2026-02-14)