New federal MDL will handle Ozempic, Wegovy and Trulicity vision loss lawsuits

A federal judicial panel created a new mass litigation on December 15, 2025 for lawsuits claiming that GLP-1 drugs caused vision loss. The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation created MDL No. 3163 and assigned it to U.S. District Judge Karen S. Marston in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ^[1][2].

The order names Ozempic, Wegovy and Saxenda, made by Novo Nordisk, and Eli Lilly's Trulicity as the drugs at issue. Plaintiffs say the drugs caused non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), a condition that occurs when blood flow to the optic nerve is blocked or reduced and that can lead to blindness ^[1][2].

The litigation covered 21 actions pending in three districts — the District of New Jersey, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and the Northern District of Texas ^[1]. The panel denied centralization for one of them, Garcia v. Eli Lilly, because that plaintiff amended his complaint to drop allegations of vision loss and now alleges only gastrointestinal injuries, leaving 20 cases to be transferred ^[1]. The panel said it had also been notified of nine related actions that could become tag-alongs ^[1].

Eli Lilly, which filed the centralization motion, asked for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania or, alternatively, for the cases to be transferred into MDL No. 3094, which handles claims that the same class of drugs caused gastrointestinal injuries ^[1]. The panel declined that second request. It said a separate MDL would let Judge Marston "determine the appropriate level of coordination between the litigations, make tracking of cases easier, and facilitate orderly docketing in each MDL" ^[1]. The panel described that reasoning as case management rather than a scientific difference between the two sets of claims, and cited its 2022 decision to create a separate MDL for Taxotere-related eye injuries ^[1].

Plaintiffs had asked unanimously for the District of New Jersey, while Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly supported Pennsylvania ^[1]. The panel chose Pennsylvania, noting that MDL 3094 is already before Judge Marston, that the NAION cases involve the same defendants and largely the same lawyers, and that some plaintiffs allege both gastrointestinal injuries and NAION ^[1].

Reuters reported that 30 optic neuropathy lawsuits are pending in federal court and more than 40 in state court, and that the filings began after a July 2024 study described a potential risk of the condition ^[2]. Nearly 3,000 lawsuits over gastroparesis, a paralysis of the gastrointestinal tract, are pending in MDL 3094, which was centralized before Judge Marston in February 2024 ^[2].

The companies have disputed both sets of claims. In court filings, they argued that the risk of gastroparesis is well publicized and that they cannot change the drugs' design without approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ^[2]. Representatives for the companies did not immediately respond to requests for comment, according to Reuters, and attorneys for the plaintiffs said in a statement that they look forward to working with Marston ^[2].

GLP-1 agonists mimic a hormone that also slows digestion and helps people feel full longer. They were originally developed to treat diabetes, and versions of the drugs are now also used for weight loss. An August study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that more than one in four adults with diabetes had used one ^[2].

Why it matters for patients

The new MDL does not change what any drug does, whether it stays on the market, or what its label says. It changes how the lawsuits move: pretrial work on questions the cases share — including failure to warn, design defect, preemption and expert testimony — will run before one judge instead of across many courts ^[1][2].

The claims remain allegations. No court has found that these drugs cause NAION, and the companies deny it ^[2]. Whether any case succeeds has not been decided.

Because the two MDLs share a judge, coordination between the vision-loss cases and the much larger gastroparesis docket is possible, but the panel left the level of coordination to Judge Marston ^[1]. Lawsuits filed in state court are not part of MDL 3163 ^[2].

What happens next

No schedule for MDL 3163 — including any hearing, discovery deadline or trial date — has been disclosed ^[1][2]. The nine related actions the panel identified could be added later as tag-alongs, and the panel noted that additional related actions are potential tag-alongs under its rules ^[1].