Victims implanted with Perfix Plug hernia mesh are filing lawsuits seeking justice and compensation against the manufacturer, Bard / Davol. Perflix Plug is a type of hernia mesh manufactured by Bard in conjunction with their subsidiary, Davol. In December 2017, BD (Becton, Dickinson and Company) acquired Bard for 24 Billion. There are currently over 40,000 hernia mesh lawsuits filed against Bard / Davol in both Federal and State Courts. Many of these lawsuits against Bard are for victims implanted with Perfix Plug or Perfix Plug Light.  No recall is required to file a Perfix Plug lawsuit. We require a revision, repair or removal surgery to file a lawsuit with certain exceptions. The Perfix Plug lawsuits are not part of a class action. Therefore, your lawsuit is an individual lawsuit and you have the right to your own hernia mesh lawyer. The Perfix Plug Lawsuits are part of consolidated lawsuits. Many hernia mesh victims are seeking pertinent information about PerFix Plug lawsuits.


Perfix plug hernia mesh lawsuit

Perfix Plug Hernia mesh lawsuit Update- January 1st, 2024-  There has been no global settlement of the Bard Hernia mesh cases or the Bard 3dMax mesh lawsuits pending in State or Federal Court. The Federal MDL has now been going on for 5 years. These are all individual cases that are consolidated in either Federal Court in Ohio or State Court in Rhode Island. There is no hernia mesh class action in the United States.  There  are currently  over 20,768 lawsuits before the Honorable Justice Edmund A. Sargus, Jr (U.S. District Judge) in MDL -2846 known as “IN RE: Davol, Inc./C.R. Bard, Inc., Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation.” There are over 10,000 Bard hernia mesh lawsuits pending in Rhode Island State Court.


There have been 4 “bellwether trials” across 2 consolidated proceedings. The Victims have won 3 trials and the defense / manufaturer has won one trial:

StinsonOct 2023$500,000 judgment win to victimOhio Multidistrict litigation
TrevinoAug 2022$4.8 million Judgment win to victimRhode Island State Court
MilanesiApril 2022$250,000 Judgment win to victimOhio Multidistrict litigation
JohnsJuly 2021Manufacturer Verdict- no liabilityOhio Multidistrict litigation

December 5, 2023-  A total of 10,000 lawsuits have settled in Rhode Island State Court.

November 9th, 2023- Verdict in Favor of victim for 500k in Federal MDL. There was a $500,000 Verdict in favor of the mesh victim, Stinson, who has Perfix mesh implanted. The jury found Bard / Davol legally liable for the defective Bard Perfix Plug mesh. The damages were extremely low.

August 6, 2023- The next MDL trial in Federal Court is scheduled for October 2023. This is the pre-selected Bard Perfix Plug lawsuit of Robert Stinson. The 4th bellwether trial in Ohio Federal Court will commence in January 2024. The fourth trial will be Jacob Bryan’s lawsuit against Bard / Davol concerning the Bard 3dMax.

August 6, 2023-The next MDL trial in Federal Court is scheduled for October 2023. This is the pre-selected Bard Perfix Plug lawsuit of Robert Stinson. The 4th bellwether trial in Ohio Federal Court will commence in January 2024. The fourth trial will be Jacob Bryan’s lawsuit against Bard / Davol concerning the Bard 3dMax.

October 1st, 2022- “A Superior Court jury on Monday awarded a Hawaii man $4.8 million for injuries he suffered from faulty surgical mesh implanted during a hernia repair. The jury reached its verdict Monday after a month-long trial before Judge Richard A. Licht, holding Warwick-based manufacturer Davol Inc., a division of C.R. Bard, liable for “severe gastrointestinal injuries” suffered by Paul Trevino, according to… the law firm representing Trevino. The jury deliberated five days before finding the company negligent in the development and sale of its Ventralex mesh hernia repair patch…” Providence Journal

April 15, 2022-  A jury in Federal Court in the Southern District of Ohio has awarded a victim a verdict against C.R. Bard and its parent company, Beckton Dickinson. Bard must pay $255,000 in damages to the victims Antonio Milanesi and his wife, Alicia Morz De Milanesi. $5,000 of those damages were for the loss of consortium claim of Mr. Milanesi’s wife. Mr. Milanesi alleged that the Bard Ventralex mesh was defective. The jury ruled in favor of Mr. Milanesi on his defective design claim but the federal jury refused to award him punitive damages. This was the second Bard hernia mesh lawsuit bellwether trial in the MDL in the Southern District of Ohio. The manufacturer prevailed in the first “bellwether” hernia mesh trial in a lawsuit selected by the manufacturer. There have been no trials in the consolidate lawsuit in state court in Rhode Island. “According to the verdict sheet (PDF), the jury sided with the plaintiffs on claims for negligent design defects and loss of consortium, but rejected claims involving strict product liability, negligent failure to warn, negligent misrepresentation, fraudulent misrepresentation and gross misconduct. Milanesi originally filed the lawsuit in 2018, after experiencing problems with a Bard Ventralex Hernia Patch implanted during umbilical hernia surgery in July 2007. After developing an infection and a small bowel fistula in May 2017, Milanesi underwent additional surgery to have the mesh removed. According to evidence presented at trial, the mesh adhered to a loop of the small bowel, leading to erosion and the need for a small bowel resection, anastomosis, removal of the mesh and repair of the ventral hernia, leaving Milanesi with permanent and severe injuries.” About lawsuits

1/29/22- Over 5000 hernia mesh lawsuits have been settled in the consolidated Rhode Island Bard / Davol hernia mesh lawsuit in Rhode Island state court. Hundreds of these settlements were for victims with Perfix plug. The Rhode Island settlements were not part of a global settlement. It is expected that thousand more lawsuits will be settled in RI in the near future. The Ohio Federal Court MDL is in the process of settlement negotiations but there have been no reported settlements.

Here are some pertinent facts about Perfix Plug lawsuits and Perfix Light Plug lawsuits:

  • Perfix Plug hernia mesh is a Monofilament Knitted Polypropylene mesh.
  • Bard mesh Perfix Plug and Perfix Light Plug is primarily used for hernia repair.
  • This mesh has become infamous for severe hernia mesh complications, mesh infection as well as mesh rejection / failure.
  • Many Perfix Plug mesh lawsuits have been filed against Bard.
  • There is currently a Multidistrict Litigation (consolidated proceeding) for all Bard hernia mesh made of Polyproplene in Federal Court in the Southern District of Ohio.
  • There are hundreds of Perfix Plug lawsuits pending in a Rhode Island State Court consolidated proceeding.
  • PerFix Plug: The PerFix plug is pre-formed, three-dimensional device constructed of fluted outer layer of small pore, heavyweight, unsuitable polypropylene mesh and multiple inner layers of that same mesh attached at the tip, with an additional separate flat, pre—shaped onlay piece of small pore, heavyweight, unsuitable polypropylene mesh. This excessive amount 0f foreign material has been flagged in the World Guidelines for Groin Hernia Management as having high incidence of erosion and lifetime risk of migration..” MASTER LONG FORM COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND, IN RE: DAVOL/ CR. BARD HERNIA MESH MULTI—CASE MANAGEMENT

The  Bard Perfix Plug hernia mesh has become infamous for severe complications and side effects including:

  • “mesh erosion,
  • extrusion / protrusion,
  • chronic pain,
  • mesh contraction,
  • infection,
  • abscesses,
  • fistulae,
  • inflammation,
  • scar tissue,
  • organ perforation,
  • dyspareunia,
  • bleeding,
  • neuropathy,
  • other acute and chronic nerve damage and pain, pelvic pain, prolapse of organs, and in most cases forcing the need for intensive medical treatment, including but not limited to operations to locate and remove mesh, operations to attempt to repair pelvic organs, tissue and nerve damage, the use of pain control and other medications, injections into various areas of the pelvis and spine.” PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT & JURY DEMAND

Bard PerFix Light Plug recall

Another Perfix plug, the Bard PerFix Light Plug was recalled in an FDA Class 2 device recall. “The Bard PerFix Light Plug is indicated for reinforcement if soft tissue, where weakness exists, in procedures involving soft tissue repair, such as groin hernia defects”  Class 2 Device Recall Bard PerFix Light Plug

PerFix Plug Lawsuit | bard mesh perfix plug

Many victims are wondering if there will be a global Perflix Plug lawsuit settlement or if any Perflix Plug lawsuits will be settled in 2024. Some aggrieved surgical mesh victims are trying to determine if the is an average settlement amount for hernia mesh lawsuits. There are no clear answer to these questions. Top hernia mesh attorneys are litigating these causes of action against Bard/ Davol seeking justice and compensation for victims.

Where will my Perfix Plug mesh lawsuit be filed?

There are three likely destinations for Perfix mesh lawsuits:

  1. The Perfix Plug lawsuits may be filed in Federal Court in the Multidistrict Litigation (MDL -2846). Only mesh manufactured by Bard / Davol composed of Polyproplene may be part of this hernia mesh lawsuit. This MDL is located in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The Presiding Justice is  Edmund A. Sargus, Jr (Chief Judge, USDC).The MDL is known as, “IN RE: Davol, Inc./C.R. Bard, Inc., Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation.” As of December, 2023 there are over 20,000  Bard lawsuits in the Federal MDL against Bard / Davol.  Many of these lawsuits are alleging that Perfix Plug and Perfix Plug Light are defective and unreasonably dangerous. Victims are seeking compensation as a result of numerous complications including: infection, mesh contraction, mesh migration as well as mesh failure.
  2. The Perfix Plug cases could  also be filed in State Courts in Rhode Island.  There is currently a consolidated State Court proceeding in Providence Superior Court for all mesh made of Polyproplene manufactured by Bard Davol.  Rhode Island has an extended, long lasting statute of limitations for certain victims of Bard / Davol mesh such as the Perfix Plug and Perfix Plug Light. This author makes the case that Rhode Island is the best place to file a Perfix Plug lawsuit.
  3. Perfix plug lawsuits could also be filed as individual cases in various state Courts. Typically hernia mesh lawyers will only file huge damage cases as individual lawsuits. The reason for this is because, hernia mesh cases are very expensive to pursue individually.

Matthew Ochoa recently filed a lawsuit complaint against Defendants C.R. BARD, INC. and BARD DAVOL, INC. This lawsuit alleges in pertinent part that:

  • “the Bard Defendants manufactured, promoted, distributed and sold for profit a product entitled BARD Perfix Plug Large-6/CTN Catalogue Number 0112970 GTIN 1080174106874 (“Bard Perfix Mesh”). Defendant promoted, distributed, and sold the Bard Perfix Mesh, as a product to repair hernia surgeries in the population. Defendant BARD describes the product as follows, “The Bard PerFix Plug is ideal for use in a tension-free preperitoneal repair technique. Since its introduction in 1993, it has been used in more than four million implants worldwide and has kept pace with new surgical techniques.” PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT & JURY DEMAND, Paragraph #26, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION, MATTHEW OCHOA, Plaintiff,V. C.R. BARD, INC., BARD DAVOL, INC., JOHNSON & JOHNSON, ETHICON, INC., ETHICON US, LLC, AND ETHICON ENDO-SURGERY, INC., Defendants.
  • “At all times relevant hereto, the Defendant knew of the defective nature of its product and its labeling as herein set forth, yet continued to design, manufacture, market, distribute and sell its product to maximize sales and profits at the expense of the general public’s health and safety in conscious disregard for the foreseeable harm caused by this product. Defendant’s conduct exhibited such an entire want of care as to establish that its actions were a result of fraud, ill will, recklessness, gross negligence or willful and intentional disregard to the Plaintiff’s individual rights, health and well-being and hence punitive damages are appropriate.” Id.


What are the alleged defects to the Perfix Plug alleged in the Ochoa lawsuit:

“a. The material is not inert and therefore reacts to human tissues and/or other naturally
occurring human bodily contents adversely affecting patient health.
b. The mesh material harbors infections that adversely affect human tissues and
patient health.
c. The mesh products migrate from the location of their implantation, adversely
affecting tissues and patient health.
d. If polypropylene, the mesh material abrades tissues adversely affecting patient
e. The pelvic mesh products regularly fail to perform the purpose of their implantation
such that the patient requires removal of the device and repeated treatment and
f. Due to their various defects, the pelvic mesh products regularly cause significant
injury to patients such that the mesh products must be removed, resulting in
additional surgery.
g. The mesh products become embedded in human tissue over time such that if it
needs to be removed due to its various defects, the removal causes damage to the
organs and tissues, adversely affecting patient health.
h. The mesh products are defective in shape, composition, weight, physical, chemical
and mechanical properties and are inappropriately engineered.
i. The mesh products erode into other pelvic organs, tissue, muscle, nerves, and bone
adversely affecting tissues and patient health.
j. The Defendants designed and defected an unreasonable dangerous hernia mesh
k. Failed to adequately research the mesh.
l. The Defendants knew or should have known about the potential risk of infections,
allergic reactions, bowel damage and other internal injuries but withheld his
information from patients and doctors.
m. Defendants failed to properly investigate reports of problems after the hernia mesh
was introduced.
n. Defendants failed to warn about the risk of injury.
o. Defendants failed to promptly issue a recall after the problems were discovered.” Id.

Adverse event report:

Lot Number 43KMD059 ??
Event Date 12/22/2010
Event Type  Injury
Event Description
Had a bard mesh perfix plug implanted to repair a right inguinal hernia in 2003. Experienced occasional excruciating pain and swelling after the recommended healing time passed, but was told by surgeon that healing can take a long time after surgery. As time went on, the pain became more and more frequent until it was so intolerable i knew something was very wrong. I was seen by another surgeon on (b)(6) 2010 and was schedule for corrective surgery the following day. I was told that the original mesh plug became detached from the muscle on one end and had folded up causing the intestine to poke through the opening and eventually get stuck. This resulted in the need for immediate corrective surgery to prevent bowel strangulation. The problem, i may be faced with now post surgery is possible permanent pain/discomfort/numbness from pubic area to thigh due to nerve damage. I’ve read reports from many other pts who experienced identical problems with this mesh plug; therefore, it is my hope that this plug will soon be added to the recall list to prevent future pts from having to experience these problems after hernia surgery.

If you are in need of legal representation contact us for a free review of your potential Perfix Plug claim. These cases will not be litigated as class actions. We are strongly opposed to class actions because individual surgical mesh victims do not have control over their case and whether they should settle. If the hernia mesh claim is accepted by a top Covidien hernia mesh law firm, the claim will be an individual lawsuit seeking justice and compensation.

Perfix Plug currently on the market: