Nov 10, 2026 | By Fob James, IV | Read Time: 5 minutes
Physician reviewing a spine X-ray that shows an implanted spinal cord stimulator while a patient waits in the exam room Articles

Last updated: November 10, 2026

Lawsuits over Abbott’s spinal cord stimulators, including the Proclaim and Eterna systems and older St. Jude Medical devices, are now centralized in a federal multidistrict litigation in Chicago. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation created MDL 3194 on October 2, 2026 and assigned it to Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins of the Northern District of Illinois. There were 27 cases pending on November 2, 2026, and the court’s first hearing is November 12, 2026. No Abbott stimulator case has been tried or settled.

Abbott Stimulator Lawsuits at a Glance

  • Court: MDL 3194, Northern District of Illinois, Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins; created October 2, 2026.
  • Cases pending: 27 as of November 2, 2026.
  • Devices: Proclaim XR, Proclaim Plus, Proclaim DRG, Eterna and older St. Jude Medical systems.
  • Next date: first hearing November 12, 2026 in Chicago. Discovery is paused and no lead counsel has been appointed.
  • Trials and settlements: none.

Why Abbott Has Its Own MDL

Abbott was part of the first request for a stimulator MDL in February 2026, alongside Boston Scientific. On June 5, 2026 the Panel created a Boston Scientific proceeding and turned Abbott down for a procedural reason: all four Abbott cases then on file were already in one district, the Northern District of Illinois, and the Panel cannot centralize cases that are not spread across districts. Plaintiffs filed a new petition on June 22. By the time the Panel ruled there were 26 Abbott cases in thirteen districts.

The Panel sent the cases to Chicago because ten were already pending there and because Abbott is headquartered in the district. It declined the plaintiffs’ suggestion to assign them to the Boston Scientific judge in California, writing that “little efficiency will be gained by placing SCS device MDLs against multiple manufacturers before one judge.” It also noted the “overlap in threshold proceedings regarding preemption,” a signal that Abbott’s federal preemption defense will be decided early.

Which Abbott Stimulators Are Named

The Panel’s order covers Abbott spinal cord stimulators generally and does not list models. The devices named in the lawsuits filed so far are:

  • Proclaim XR and Proclaim Plus, non-rechargeable generators that the patient controls from a phone or handheld app
  • Proclaim DRG, which stimulates the dorsal root ganglion and is used for complex regional pain syndrome of the lower limbs
  • Eterna, Abbott’s small rechargeable system
  • Older St. Jude Medical systems such as Eon and Prodigy. Abbott completed its acquisition of St. Jude Medical in January 2017 and inherited its neuromodulation business.

Abbott’s Infinity system, which appears in the 2023 recall discussed below, is a deep brain stimulator, not a spinal cord stimulator, and is not part of this litigation.

What the Abbott Lawsuits Allege

The Panel described the common questions as Abbott’s regulatory compliance, its use of the FDA’s premarket approval supplement process, and the conduct of its sales representatives. In plainer terms, plaintiffs allege that Abbott’s current stimulators are the product of a long chain of changes to a device approved years ago, more than 230 of them according to one complaint, each cleared through a supplement without new clinical trials; that Abbott did not warn patients and doctors about shocks, burns, lead migration and loss of therapy; and that its representatives programmed devices and reassured patients in ways that amounted to practicing medicine. Patients report injuries that include painful shocks and jolts, burning at the generator site, leads that moved or broke, devices that stopped working, new nerve symptoms, and revision or removal surgery. Abbott denies the allegations.

Abbott’s Recall History

In July 2023 Abbott issued a correction, classified by the FDA as a Class I recall, for Proclaim and Infinity implantable generators that could fail to exit MRI mode, leaving the patient without therapy. It covered more than 155,000 devices distributed in the United States between 2015 and 2023. Abbott reported 186 incidents and 73 injuries and addressed the problem with instructions and a software update; it did not ask for devices to be removed, although the FDA noted that a device that could not be restored might have to be surgically replaced.

Abbott has issued other corrections since. In 2024 it told doctors that the interval between a Proclaim’s battery-replacement warning and the end of the battery’s life could be much shorter than labeled. In 2025 it issued a correction for Eterna generators that could lose Bluetooth communication, in some cases requiring another procedure. A lawsuit does not depend on any of these, and most Abbott plaintiffs’ injuries have nothing to do with MRI mode. The recalls matter as evidence of what Abbott knew about its devices and when.

What Happens Next in MDL 3194

Judge Jenkins entered Case Management Order No. 1 on October 13, 2026. It pauses all discovery, terminates motions that were pending in the transferred cases so they can be refiled in an orderly way, and sets an in-person hearing for November 12, 2026 at the Dirksen Courthouse in Chicago. The court has said it will not choose the plaintiffs’ lead lawyers at that hearing but will set up the process for doing so. After leadership is appointed, expect a master complaint, Abbott’s motion to dismiss on preemption grounds, and eventually an order allowing new cases to be filed directly in the MDL. As of the court’s first order there was no direct filing procedure, so a new Abbott case is filed in the patient’s home federal court and transferred.

Who May Qualify for an Abbott Stimulator Claim

  • You received a permanent Abbott or St. Jude Medical spinal cord or DRG stimulator.
  • You then had shocks or burning, lead migration or fracture, loss of therapy, a serious infection, or new nerve, bowel or bladder problems.
  • You needed a revision, replacement or removal, a hospital stay or repeated reprogramming, or were told to turn the device off.
  • Your state’s deadline has not passed: one year in Tennessee, two in Alabama and Georgia, three in North Carolina, usually counted from the first sign of trouble and not from the removal.

Your implant card, the Abbott app on your phone or the operative report will confirm the model. Do not turn off or remove a device on your own account; that is a decision for you and your doctor.

Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit FAQs

Is there an Abbott spinal cord stimulator class action?

No. Abbott cases are individual lawsuits coordinated in MDL 3194 in the Northern District of Illinois. Each patient has a separate case, and any recovery depends on that patient’s own injuries.

Has Abbott settled any spinal cord stimulator lawsuits?

No. As of November 2026 there has been no settlement and no verdict in an Abbott stimulator product liability case, and the MDL has not set trial dates.

Was my Abbott Proclaim recalled?

Proclaim XR, Proclaim Plus and Proclaim DRG generators distributed between 2015 and 2023 were covered by Abbott’s July 2023 MRI-mode correction, which the FDA classified as a Class I recall. It was handled with instructions and software, not by removing devices. Ask your pain clinic whether your device was affected and updated.

Are St. Jude Medical stimulators included?

Lawsuits have named older St. Jude Medical systems as well as current Abbott devices, because Abbott acquired St. Jude in 2017. Older implants raise deadline and repose questions, so the implant date should be checked first.

For all four manufacturers, the injuries and the deadlines, see our spinal cord stimulator lawsuit guide and the latest lawsuit update. State guides: Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina. To have an Abbott claim reviewed at no charge, call Fob & Foster Personal Injury Lawyers at (205) 407-6009.

Related Practice Areas

Author Photo

Fob James, IV

Fob James obtained a B.S., in software engineering from Auburn University and then continued his education by getting his J.D. from Vanderbilt University School of Law. After working for a large national firm for several years, Fob found that his passion was fighting for individuals who have been seriously injured or wronged by others. Fob believes that the jury is the great equalizer to the power and influence that large corporations have in society. Many of Fob’s cases are high profile and have been featured in, among others: Bloomberg News, PlanAdvisor, AL.com, PlanSponsor, National Law Review, and BusinessInsider. For his work in obtaining numerous multi-million dollar outcomes for his clients, Fob has been recognized by: National Trial Lawyers Top 100, SuperLawyers Rising Star (2020-2026), Birmingham Business Journal Who’s Who in Law (2023-2025), and TrustAnalytica – Top Personal Injury Lawyers in Alabama.