The Ozempic lawsuit is a growing body of product liability cases accusing Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly of selling GLP-1 drugs — Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus, Mounjaro, Zepbound, and Trulicity — without adequately warning patients and doctors about severe gastrointestinal injuries and sudden vision loss. As of June 1, 2026, more than 3,700 federal cases were pending in a Pennsylvania multidistrict litigation, with a second MDL handling vision loss claims, no settlements reached, and the first bellwether trials still ahead.1Motley Rice. Ozempic Lawsuits
What Plaintiffs Say the Drugs Did to Them
The claims fall into two broad groups: gastrointestinal injuries and vision loss.
The gastrointestinal cases are the larger group. Plaintiffs allege the drugs caused gastroparesis (a condition where the stomach stops moving food into the small intestine), intestinal blockages, bowel obstructions, severe constipation, pancreatitis, and gallbladder disease that required surgical removal. Many describe repeated hospitalizations, violent vomiting, inability to eat, and lasting digestive dysfunction.2Robert King Law Firm. Ozempic Lawsuit The severity varies widely. One young Idaho plaintiff who used Mounjaro and Ozempic reportedly required removal of roughly 80 percent of her stomach. A 73-year-old Florida woman tied her gastroparesis to Trulicity.3Miller & Zois. Ozempic Gallbladder Lawsuit
The vision loss cases involve non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy, or NAION, sometimes called an “eye stroke.” It happens when blood flow to the optic nerve is disrupted, and the vision loss is usually sudden, painless, and permanent. These claims took off after a July 2024 study in JAMA Ophthalmology by researchers at Massachusetts Eye and Ear found elevated NAION risk among semaglutide users — a hazard ratio of 4.28 for patients with type 2 diabetes and 7.64 for overweight or obese patients — though the authors noted the study was observational and did not establish causation.4JAMA Network. Risk of Nonarteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy in Patients Prescribed Semaglutide
The core legal theory in both groups is failure to warn: that Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly knew or should have known about these risks and did not say enough on the label or to prescribing doctors. Secondary theories include defective design, negligent misrepresentation, breach of warranty, and gross negligence.1Motley Rice. Ozempic Lawsuits
Which Drugs and Companies Are Covered
Although the litigation is widely called the “Ozempic lawsuit,” it reaches further. Novo Nordisk is sued over Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus. Eli Lilly is sued over Mounjaro, Zepbound, and Trulicity. All six are GLP-1 receptor agonists, prescribed for type 2 diabetes, weight loss, or both. If your injury involves a different drug class, or a drug not named here, the MDLs don’t cover it.
Where the Cases Are Being Heard
Most federal cases are consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania before Judge Karen Spencer Marston. There are two separate proceedings.
MDL No. 3094, formally In re: Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists (GLP-1 RAs) Products Liability Litigation, was created on February 2, 2024, and handles the gastrointestinal injury claims. Its caseload grew from about 1,800 cases in August 2025 to 3,763 by June 1, 2026.1Motley Rice. Ozempic Lawsuits5Darrow.ai. Ozempic Lawsuit
MDL No. 3163 was established on December 15, 2025 to handle the NAION vision loss claims. More than 100 federal vision loss cases had been filed by June 2026. Additional vision loss cases are consolidated in a New Jersey state multicounty litigation in Bergen County before Superior Court Judge Gregg A. Padovano.6Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. MDL-3163 Transfer Order7Drugwatch. Ozempic Lawsuit8New Jersey Courts. NAION MCL Designation Order
This is multidistrict litigation, not a class action. Each plaintiff’s case is evaluated on its own medical records and facts. Bellwether trials — a handful of representative cases tried first — will test how juries respond and shape any later settlement talks.
The Ruling That Could Narrow Who Qualifies
On August 15, 2025, Judge Marston issued what is so far the most consequential ruling in the gastrointestinal MDL. The question was what medical proof a plaintiff needs to show they actually have gastroparesis.
The defense position was that a plaintiff needs an objective gastric emptying study, done while symptoms were present, measuring how quickly food leaves the stomach. Plaintiffs argued that doctors can diagnose drug-induced gastroparesis clinically, using patient history and other imaging such as CT scans or endoscopies.
The court sided with the defendants. Judge Marston excluded two of the plaintiffs’ general experts: a gastroenterologist who proposed diagnosis by differential methods alone, and a radiologist who proposed using x-rays and CT scans in place of a gastric emptying study. The court called the gastroenterologist’s theory a “hypothesis which has not yet been subjected to the rigors of science” and said the radiologist could cite no supporting literature and had offered testimony that “frequently changed” across reports, depositions, and hearings.9Drug and Device Law Blog. Trimming Down the GLP-1 MDL
The practical consequence: a plaintiff pursuing a gastroparesis claim generally needs a gastric emptying study in their records showing abnormal stomach retention. Cases without that objective test face dismissal, which may significantly narrow the viable pool.10Wagstaff Cartmell. GLP-1 Multidistrict Litigation MDL 3094
What the FDA Has Done
Label changes have moved in the plaintiffs’ direction over the life of the litigation, which matters because the central claim is that earlier warnings were inadequate.
In September 2023, the FDA updated Ozempic’s label to acknowledge postmarketing reports of ileus (intestinal blockage), while cautioning that voluntary reports cannot reliably establish frequency or causation.11CNN. FDA Ozempic Label A January 2025 revision added a warning about pulmonary aspiration during general anesthesia, tied to delayed gastric emptying.12FDA. Ozempic Prescribing Information (January 2025) By October 2025, the label carried a dedicated “Severe Gastrointestinal Adverse Reactions” warning section and stated Ozempic is “not recommended in patients with severe gastroparesis,” with ileus, intestinal obstruction, and severe constipation including fecal impaction listed in postmarketing adverse events.13FDA. Ozempic Prescribing Information (October 2025)
Then in March 2026, the FDA sent Novo Nordisk a warning letter citing “serious violations” of postmarketing adverse event reporting rules. An inspection the prior year found that company procedures allowed adverse event reports to be rejected when a reporter deemed them “unrelated” to the product, that staff improperly invalidated required 15-day alert reports, and that cases sat in medical review past required deadlines. The FDA called the pattern “systemic failures” and demanded a corrective action plan. The agency stressed that the letter did not conclude the drugs caused the reported events — the problem was the reporting process.14FDA. Warning Letter: Novo Nordisk Inc. 71757615The Cardiology Advisor. FDA Warns Novo Nordisk Broke Safety Reporting Rules
On the vision loss question, the FDA has said it is analyzing its national electronic data system to determine whether a safety signal exists for NAION but has not reached a conclusion. NAION is not currently listed as an adverse reaction on U.S. semaglutide labels.16Fox 5 DC. Dozens Sue Ozempic Maker After Sudden Vision Loss
How Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly Are Defending the Cases
Both manufacturers deny wrongdoing and say their drugs are safe when used as directed.
Novo Nordisk argues the labels already warned of gastrointestinal effects and that delayed gastric emptying is a known mechanism of action for GLP-1 drugs, not a hidden risk. On the vision loss claims, it says NAION is not an established adverse reaction and that semaglutide’s “benefit-risk profile remains favorable.”16Fox 5 DC. Dozens Sue Ozempic Maker After Sudden Vision Loss Eli Lilly has taken a similar line and in March 2025 filed a motion to dismiss some stomach paralysis claims.17Drugwatch. Mounjaro Lawsuit
Both companies also argue that plaintiffs’ underlying diabetes or obesity may explain their conditions, and that GLP-1 drugs may unmask pre-existing digestive problems rather than cause new ones.10Wagstaff Cartmell. GLP-1 Multidistrict Litigation MDL 3094 The diagnostic rigor argument — that only a gastric emptying study reliably proves gastroparesis — paid off in the August 2025 ruling and now shapes who can keep a case alive.
Settlements, Trial Timing, and What to Expect
No settlements have been reached in either MDL, and no case has gone to trial.
In MDL 3094, expert depositions wrapped up in April 2026 and summary judgment briefing continues through July 2026. Case Management Order No. 30, entered in January 2026, set the framework for expert disclosures, Daubert motions, and bellwether selection. First bellwether trials are expected in mid-to-late 2026, though no firm date has been set.18MDL Update. MDL 3094 Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists
MDL 3163 is further behind. The court held a “Science Day” in March 2026, appointed plaintiffs’ leadership counsel in February 2026, and issued discovery and preservation orders through April 2026, with monthly conferences scheduled through the year.19Eastern District of Pennsylvania. MDL 3163 Orders
Some legal analysts have put aggregate potential liability across both MDLs at more than $2 billion and projected per-plaintiff settlement ranges from roughly $100,000 to $250,000 for mild gastroparesis up to over $1 million for total blindness. Those figures are speculative projections drawn from comparable mass torts, not offers, verdicts, or payouts in this litigation.20Spencer Law. Ozempic Lawsuit MDR Updates Eligibility Settlements Any realistic sense of settlement value will come after the first bellwether verdicts, not before.