Medical Device Litigation
Stryker LFIT V40 Hip Litigation: MDL 2768 Status
Federal claims about Stryker LFIT V40 femoral heads are consolidated as MDL 2768. The 2016 recall, the alleged taper failure and the docket's decline.
On this page
Something in this article wrong, out of date, or missing its source? Send the editorial desk a note.
The Stryker LFIT V40 litigation is a group of federal product liability cases about a cobalt-chromium femoral head used in total hip replacement. The cases are consolidated as MDL No. 2768 in the District of Massachusetts before Judge Indira Talwani. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation counted 47 actions pending as of October 1, 2026, against 1,240 filed. The documents reviewed here establish a 2016 recall and a 2018 manufacturer safety notification, but no court finding of causation and no approved settlement.
What the device is
The LFIT Anatomic CoCr V40 femoral head is a modular hip implant component. The FDA’s enforcement record describes it as designed “to be locked onto a femoral hip stem trunnion during surgery for total hip replacement” (FDA record Z-0378-2017). The femoral head is the ball at the top of the implant. Here it is a separate piece attached to the stem during surgery. The claims concern the junction where the head meets the stem, called the taper junction, and what happens when the two parts do not lock together as intended.
What the 2016 recall said
On August 29, 2016, Stryker Howmedica Osteonics Corp. initiated a voluntary recall of LFIT Anatomic CoCr V40 femoral heads. The FDA record assigns it recall number Z-0378-2017. The stated reason is that Stryker “received several complaints describing incidence of harm secondary to taper lock failure for specific lots of numerous catalog numbers of LFIT Anatomic CoCr V40 Femoral Heads” (FDA record).
The record gives the quantity as 42,519 units and the distribution as “US Nationwide and Internationally.”
The JPML’s transfer order describes the same action: on August 29, 2016 Stryker “issued a voluntary recall of certain lots of the device manufactured before March 2011, due to harm secondary to failure of the femoral head to fully lock onto the stem at the stem-head taper junction, i.e., ’taper lock failure’” (transfer order).
The recall record reports the company’s stated reason and the product covered; it is not a finding that the device was defective or caused any injury.
What is established vs. what is alleged
Established by the court and agency record
- The federal proceeding exists. The JPML centralized the actions as MDL No. 2768 in the District of Massachusetts and assigned them to Judge Talwani. The transfer order is dated April 5, 2017 (transfer order).
- The docket is much smaller than it once was. The Panel’s October 1, 2026 report lists 47 actions now pending and 1,240 total actions for MDL 2768 (JPML report).
- The recall happened on the date and in the quantity stated. The FDA record gives August 29, 2016 as the initiation date and 42,519 units as the quantity (FDA record).
- Stryker sent a follow-up safety notification in 2018. The company’s product safety notification RA2018-1757583 is dated May 2018 and was posted by Germany’s Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices on June 26, 2018 (safety notification).
Alleged in the litigation
The transfer order summarizes the plaintiffs’ theory. The claims focus on “the performance of the LFIT V40 cobalt-chromium device, in particular the alleged propensity of the device to cause corrosion at the taper junction when paired with femoral stems made from different alloys (such as HOC’s proprietary TMZF, which is an alloy of titanium, molybdenum, zirconium and iron).” The order says the alleged corrosion can lead to “failure of the implant or other serious health consequences and necessitates surgery to remove and replace the implants” (transfer order).
Those are allegations recited in a transfer order, which is a procedural ruling about where pretrial proceedings should occur. The order did not decide whether the allegations are true.
The order also records a dispute about scope. Stryker asked the Panel to limit the MDL to recalled devices. The Panel declined. It found that all LFIT V40 devices were “substantially similar (whether recalled or not)” and that claims about non-recalled devices should be included (transfer order). That ruling widened the docket without deciding any claim on its merits.
What the 2018 safety notification added
The 2018 notice is a manufacturer communication, not a new court order. Its type of action is stated as “Safety Notification.” It covers eight catalog numbers: 6260-9-036, 6260-9-136, 6260-9-236, 6260-9-336, 6260-9-040, 6260-9-140, 6260-9-044 and 6260-9-144.
The notice says Stryker had received “a higher than expected number of complaints documenting femoral head/hip stem dissociation for certain sizes of LFIT Anatomic CoCr V40 Femoral Heads manufactured prior to March 4, 2011.” It states that “the complaint rate is less than 0.3% for the Products within the scope of this notification” (safety notification).
It lists clinical conditions that “may potentially be related to femoral head/hip stem dissociation,” including dislocation, pain associated with implant loosening, periprosthetic fracture, revision to alleviate the situation, leg length discrepancy, loss of mobility, pain requiring revision surgery, inflammatory response and adverse local tissue reaction.
The notice also states two practical points. It says “all affected products are either expired or already implanted,” and it says Stryker did “not recommend any changes to the frequency of the standard follow-up care protocol” for patients with the affected lots. It adds that complaints of new or continued pain, stiffness, instability or swelling in the hip, groin, buttock or thigh warrant further investigation (safety notification).
Those statements describe the company’s own assessment and its recommended handling of the devices. They are not findings by a court or by the FDA.
Where the claims stand procedurally
An MDL is not a class action. It consolidates pretrial proceedings before one judge while each plaintiff keeps a separate case. The difference is explained in MDL versus class action. Other medical device litigation follows the same structure, including the hernia mesh, Exactech implant and Biocell breast implant proceedings.
When the Panel created MDL 2768, its transfer order covered six actions in three districts. It noted that the parties had since identified 27 additional potentially related actions, and that 33 cases were then pending in 17 districts (transfer order).
By October 1, 2026, the Panel counted 47 actions still pending against 1,240 filed. That means 1,193 actions are no longer counted as pending in the Panel’s table. The table reports case counts, not outcomes, and it does not distinguish dismissal, remand, transfer, consolidation or settlement. The documents reviewed for this article do not include a global settlement approval order or a trial verdict in MDL 2768, and this article does not state that either occurred.
Key dates
- August 29, 2016: Stryker initiates the voluntary recall of certain LFIT Anatomic CoCr V40 femoral heads (FDA record).
- April 5, 2017: The JPML creates MDL No. 2768 in the District of Massachusetts and assigns it to Judge Talwani (transfer order).
- May 2018: Stryker issues product safety notification RA2018-1757583 for heads manufactured before March 4, 2011 (safety notification).
- June 26, 2018: BfArM posts the manufacturer’s notification on its field safety corrective action page (safety notification).
- October 1, 2026: The JPML reports 47 actions pending and 1,240 filed in MDL 2768 (JPML report).
What this does not establish
The record reviewed here does not contain a judicial finding that an LFIT V40 femoral head caused any plaintiff’s injury. The transfer order recites allegations. The recall record states the company’s reason for the recall. The 2018 notice states the company’s complaint experience and its follow-up recommendations.
The record does not establish that every recalled device failed or that every patient with a listed catalog number has a claim. The notice puts the complaint rate for the products in scope at less than 0.3 percent. A recall or safety notification is a product action, not a determination of liability, causation or damages. The 47 pending cases are not a measure of merit, and the Panel’s table does not explain why the other 1,193 actions left the count.
Frequently asked questions
Is MDL 2768 a class action?
No. It is a multidistrict proceeding. Individual plaintiffs keep separate cases, and the Panel consolidates pretrial proceedings before one judge. See MDL versus class action.
Was the LFIT V40 femoral head recalled?
Yes. Stryker initiated a voluntary recall on August 29, 2016, recorded by the FDA as Z-0378-2017. The record states a quantity of 42,519 units and a reason of complaints of harm secondary to taper lock failure (FDA record).
Has a court found that the device is defective or caused injury?
Not in the documents reviewed for this article. The transfer order describes the plaintiffs’ allegations and the Panel’s reasons for consolidating the cases. It does not make a causation or defect finding.
Is there a settlement in MDL 2768?
No settlement approval order appears in the documents reviewed for this article. The Panel’s October 1, 2026 report shows 47 actions still pending. This article does not state that a settlement exists or that none does.
Can new cases still be filed?
MDL 2768 remains on the Panel’s pending list as of October 1, 2026. Whether a particular person can file depends on state law, the implant date and the facts. See statute of limitations rules for injury claims.
Sources
- United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation: “MDL Statistics Report - Distribution of Pending MDL Dockets by Actions Pending” (link, accessed 2026-10-19)
- United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation: “Transfer Order, In re Stryker Orthopaedics LFIT V40 Femoral Head Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2768” (link, accessed 2026-10-19)
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration: “Device Enforcement Report Z-0378-2017, Stryker LFIT Anatomic V40 Femoral Head” (link, accessed 2026-10-19)
- Stryker Howmedica Osteonics Corp., published by the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM): “Product Safety Notification RA2018-1757583, LFIT Anatomic CoCr V40 Femoral Heads” (link, accessed 2026-10-19) CollectiveClaim.us publishes general legal information. This article is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Court records and agency actions change; verify current status with the court or agency before relying on it.