In two federal multidistrict litigations in Pennsylvania, patients allege Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly failed to warn that Ozempic, Mounjaro, and other GLP-1 drugs cause gastrointestinal injuries and vision loss. On October 13, 2026, the federal court heard closing arguments on expert-evidence motions in the gastrointestinal-injury case, a step that precedes any bellwether trial. The court has not yet ruled, and no settlements have been announced.
Latest development Oct 13, 2026
On October 13, 2026, Judge Karen S. Marston heard closing arguments in MDL 3094 on the pending Rule 702 motions. The motions cover Cross Cutting Issues 2 and 3 (warnings, preemption, and general causation), and the hearing followed an October 8 scheduling order. As of late October 2026, the court had not ruled on the admissibility motions.
Why it matters
The multidistrict litigations will decide whether GLP-1 drugs can cause the alleged gastrointestinal injuries and vision loss, whether the labels warned adequately, and whether federal preemption bars the claims. The answers affect thousands of plaintiffs, Novo Nordisk, and Eli Lilly.
Background
The litigation began in August 2023, when a plaintiff filed a federal lawsuit in Louisiana alleging that Novo Nordisk’s Ozempic caused gastroparesis. Similar suits followed against Novo Nordisk (Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus) and Eli Lilly and Company (Mounjaro, Zepbound, Trulicity). The plaintiffs allege that the companies failed to warn that these glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists can cause gastroparesis, ileus, bowel obstruction, and other severe gastrointestinal injuries. In February 2024, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) centralized the federal cases in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania as MDL 3094.
In May 2024, after the death of Judge Gene E.K. Pratter, the litigation was reassigned to Judge Karen S. Marston. In August 2025, Judge Marston issued a gatekeeping ruling requiring gastroparesis plaintiffs to produce objective diagnostic proof, a gastric emptying study, to proceed. In December 2025, the JPML created a second MDL (No. 3163), also before Judge Marston. It covers claims that GLP-1 drugs cause non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), a form of sudden and irreversible vision loss. In January 2026, the court’s CMO 30 set the expert-discovery and Daubert schedule, and expert depositions in MDL 3094 concluded in April 2026.
On May 19, 2026, the parties filed opening briefs on Rule 702 (Daubert) challenges and on summary judgment covering preemption, warning adequacy, and general causation. Opposition and reply briefing continued through the summer. In MDL 3163, both sides presented competing science on GLP-1 drugs and NAION at a Science Day on June 2, 2026, ahead of expert discovery on causation. In July 2026, the court held a status conference in MDL 3163 on the docket and parallel state-court vision-loss litigation. As of July 2026, the gastrointestinal docket stood at roughly 3,850 pending cases, about three-quarters alleging gastroparesis.
As of July 2026, bellwether selection was expected in the second half of 2026, with first trials possible in late 2026 or 2027. In September 2026, the court set a consolidated Rule 702 evidentiary hearing in MDL 3094 on warnings, preemption, and causation, to precede any bellwether trial. First noticed for September 10–18, the hearing ran from September 14 to 18, 2026. Following an October 8 scheduling order, the court heard closing arguments on October 13, 2026, and it had not ruled as of late October. The NAION docket had about 216 cases as of September 1, 2026, and no settlements have been announced in either proceeding.
Timeline 13 events
-
HearingCourt hears closing arguments on Rule 702 motions
Judge Marston heard closing arguments in MDL 3094 on the Rule 702 motions concerning warnings, preemption, and general causation. No ruling had issued as of the next docket review.
MDL 3094 In Re: Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists (GLP-1 RAS) Products Liability Litigation (GI Injuries)Ozempic Lawsuit Update 2026: MDL 3094 Status
-
HearingConsolidated Rule 702 hearing concludes without ruling
The evidentiary hearing on warnings, preemption, and general-causation expert testimony in MDL 3094 ran September 14–18, 2026, later than the originally noticed September 10–18 window. Judge Marston had not ruled on the admissibility motions as of late September.
MDL 3094 In Re: Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists (GLP-1 RAS) Products Liability Litigation (GI Injuries)Ozempic Lawsuit Update September 2026: MDL 3094Ozempic Lawsuit Tracker: MDL 3094 (September 2026)
-
OrderCourt sets Rule 702 hearing for September 10–18, 2026
Judge Marston scheduled a consolidated Rule 702 expert-evidence hearing on warnings, preemption, and causation to precede any bellwether trial in MDL 3094.
GLP-1 MDL 3094 Update: Ozempic Lawsuit Status July 2026Ozempic Lawsuit | Latest Litigation News for July 2026
-
HearingNAION MDL holds status conference on docket and state-court coordination
Attorneys in MDL 3163 appeared before Judge Marston for a status conference covering a docket overview and a report on parallel state-court GLP-1 vision-loss litigation.
-
OrderParties brief Daubert and summary-judgment motions in MDL 3094
Expert depositions concluded in April 2026. Briefing extended through July, with bellwether selection expected in the second half of 2026 and first trials possible in late 2026 or 2027.
-
HearingCourt holds Science Day in NAION MDL
Both sides presented the competing science on GLP-1 drugs and NAION vision loss to Judge Marston ahead of expert discovery on causation.
-
FilingParties file opening Rule 702 and summary-judgment briefs in MDL 3094
Plaintiffs and defendants filed opening briefs on Rule 702 (Daubert) challenges and on summary judgment covering preemption, warning adequacy, and general causation. Opposition and reply briefing continued through the summer.
-
OrderCourt issues CMO 30 setting expert-discovery and Daubert schedule
-
FilingJPML creates NAION vision-loss MDL 3163
Claims that GLP-1 drugs cause non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy were centralized in a second MDL in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, also before Judge Marston.
-
OrderCourt requires objective proof for gastroparesis claims
Judge Marston’s gatekeeping ruling required gastroparesis plaintiffs to produce objective diagnostic evidence, a gastric emptying study, narrowing the eligible case pool.
-
OrderMDL reassigned to Judge Karen S. Marston
Following the death of Judge Gene E.K. Pratter, the litigation was reassigned to Judge Marston.
-
FilingJPML creates MDL 3094 in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Federal gastrointestinal-injury cases against Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly were centralized in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
-
FilingPlaintiff sues Novo Nordisk in Louisiana over Ozempic gastroparesis
The federal suit opened the GLP-1 injury litigation.
Experimental AI forecast
How it is madeHow will the court rule on the Rule 702 and summary-judgment motions on warnings, preemption, and general causation in MDL 3094 by June 30, 2027?
- Court splits the claims40%
- Novo and Lilly defeat the claims20%
- Plaintiffs’ core claims survive19%
- Still pending on June 30, 202718%
- Global settlement announced3%
- Resolves by
- Jun 30, 2027in 8 months
- Record confidence
- Medium
A split ruling is most likely, at 40%, with some gastrointestinal injury categories or theories proceeding and others excluded or dismissed by June 30, 2027. The motions span several injuries and three distinct issues, so a uniform result is less likely. A complete defense win stands at 20%, and core claims surviving at 19%.
How it resolves. Resolves on the first of these events to occur by June 30, 2027, based on court orders and public reporting. “Plaintiffs’ core claims survive” if the court denies the motions in principal part, so that gastroparesis failure-to-warn claims and most other gastrointestinal injury categories proceed toward bellwether trials. “Novo and Lilly defeat the claims” if the court excludes plaintiffs’ general-causation or warnings experts, or grants summary judgment on preemption, so that all or substantially all MDL 3094 claims fail. “Court splits the claims” if at least one major injury category or claim theory proceeds while at least one other is excluded or dismissed on these grounds. “Global settlement announced” if Novo Nordisk or Eli Lilly publicly announces an agreement to resolve the MDL 3094 docket before any such ruling. “Still pending” if none of these has occurred by June 30, 2027.
Reasoning
Starting point. Consolidated general-causation and preemption Rule 702 and summary-judgment rulings in pharmaceutical product-liability MDLs: Roughly one-third of pharma MDL general-causation rulings end the docket (Zoloft, Lipitor, Zantac, acetaminophen), roughly one-third let core claims proceed, and the rest split by injury or theory. Most rulings issue within 3 to 9 months of the hearing.
Pharma MDL general-causation rulings divide roughly into thirds: docket-ending exclusions, core claims surviving, and split results. This docket favors a split. The motions cover gastroparesis, ileus, bowel obstruction, and other injuries, plus separate warnings and preemption questions, and each can come out differently. The August 2025 order requiring gastric emptying studies already narrowed the gastroparesis pool, which may strengthen the remaining claims on causation but does not settle warnings or preemption. A full defense win remains a real alternative at 20%, given past MDLs where exclusion of general-causation experts ended the litigation. Since the previous forecast, the court heard closing arguments on October 13, 2026, which completes the record and moves “still pending” down from 24% to 18%. The court still has about eight months to rule on a large evidentiary record, so some delay risk remains. A global settlement before the ruling is unlikely. Neither defendant has announced talks, and both sides have an incentive to learn the Daubert result first.
Multiple injury categories make a split ruling more likely · Closing arguments completed October 13, 2026, record now closed · Preemption and warnings issues can be decided separately from causation · Prior gastric-emptying requirement already narrowed the gastroparesis claims · No settlement talks disclosed before the Daubert ruling
Generated automatically by Claude Opus 5.5 on Oct 22, 2026 from this case’s record on this site, and published without editorial review. The probabilities are the model’s judgment, not measured frequencies, and they are scored publicly as cases resolve. Not legal or investment advice. How the forecasts are made