If you were implanted with an Atrium C-QUR hernia mesh and later needed treatment for infection, adhesions, or removal surgery, here is the honest status of MDL 2753 — a litigation that resolved through a reported ~$66 million settlement and is now winding down, not an open claims opportunity.
Allegations Only · Settled Without Admission
This page describes litigation and its resolution. The statements below are unproven allegations. Atrium Medical Corp. and its parent, Getinge, have not been found liable — no C-QUR design case was tried to a verdict, and the reported global settlement was reached without any admission of wrongdoing. This page is informational and is not legal or medical advice. Do not stop using any prescribed medical treatment without consulting your doctor.
What Is This About?
Atrium C-QUR (pronounced "secure") is a line of polypropylene hernia mesh distinguished by an Omega-3 fatty-acid coating derived from fish oil. Atrium marketed the coating as a bioabsorbable barrier meant to reduce the mesh sticking to internal tissue. Thousands of patients who were implanted with C-QUR devices later sued, alleging the coating did the opposite of what was promised.The federal cases were consolidated in multidistrict litigation known as MDL 2753, In re: Atrium Medical Corp. C-Qur Mesh Products Liability Litigation, before Chief Judge Landya B. McCafferty in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire — Atrium's home district. The litigation was centralized there in December 2016. These are individual injury cases coordinated for pretrial handling; there is no class action.
Unlike the larger C.R. Bard hernia mesh litigation, the Atrium C-QUR MDL never reached a bellwether jury verdict. Instead, the parties resolved the bulk of the cases through a global settlement — without Atrium admitting any defect or wrongdoing — and the docket has been steadily winding down.
Which C-QUR Products Are Involved?
The litigation focuses on Atrium's Omega-3-coated C-QUR mesh line. The products most often named include:• C-QUR mesh (the original)
• C-QUR V-Patch
• C-QUR TacShield
• C-QUR Mosaic
• C-QUR FX / CentriFX
• C-QUR Edge
• C-QUR Film
All share the same defining feature: a polypropylene base coated with a gel made from Omega-3 fatty acids. Atrium is based in Hudson, New Hampshire, and is part of the Maquet group, which is owned by Sweden's Getinge Group.
What Do the Lawsuits Allege?
Plaintiffs allege that the fish-oil coating, rather than acting as an inert barrier, triggers an allergic or inflammatory foreign-body reaction once implanted. The core legal theories are design defect, manufacturing defect, and failure to warn. Plaintiffs allege the coating and mesh together caused:• Chronic inflammation and a foreign-body immune response
• Adhesions (the mesh sticking to organs) and bowel complications
• Infection that can be difficult to clear
• Mesh degradation, failure to incorporate, and migration
• Fistula formation and chronic pain
• The need for revision or removal (explant) surgery
None of these allegations was established as fact against Atrium in a trial — no C-QUR design case reached a jury verdict, and the company resolved the litigation without admitting causation or defect.
The FDA Warning Letter & 2015 Consent Decree
Running alongside the injury lawsuits is a separate regulatory track. In 2012, the FDA issued a warning letter to Atrium's Hudson, New Hampshire manufacturing facility, citing quality-system and manufacturing deficiencies — including complaint-handling and process changes in how the mesh was coated. In 2015, at the request of the Department of Justice on the FDA's behalf, a federal court entered a consent decree of permanent injunction against Maquet/Atrium that halted manufacture and distribution of devices from the Hudson plant until it came into compliance with federal requirements.This government enforcement action is a documented, proven matter and is distinct from the plaintiffs' product-liability allegations — but plaintiffs have pointed to the FDA's findings as part of the backdrop for their claims.
The ~$66 Million Getinge Settlement
The first case designated for a bellwether trial, Barron v. Atrium, was set for trial in July 2021 but settled just before jury selection and was dismissed in August 2021 — so, unlike the Bard mesh MDL, no Atrium bellwether verdict was ever returned.In December 2021, Getinge announced a settlement reported at approximately $66 million to resolve more than 3,000 C-QUR claims consolidated in MDL 2753. The resolution was structured through a court-approved qualified settlement fund: a special master evaluates each claim and assigns an individual value using a point matrix that weighs factors such as injury severity, medical records, and whether the patient needed revision surgery. The individual allocations and terms are confidential, and the settlement was reached without any admission of wrongdoing.
Because claims are resolved confidentially through claimants' attorneys and the special-master process, there is no public claim form to complete on this page. As the fund is administered, the number of pending actions has fallen through 2026 — from roughly 302 in January to about 149 by July 1 — which is the signature of an MDL working through its residual cases and closing out.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Atrium C-QUR hernia mesh lawsuit about?
Plaintiffs alleged that Atrium's C-QUR hernia mesh — a polypropylene mesh coated with an Omega-3 fish-oil gel — triggered an inflammatory foreign-body reaction rather than acting as an inert barrier, leading to chronic inflammation, adhesions, infection, mesh failure, and the need for revision surgery. The federal cases were consolidated in MDL 2753 in the District of New Hampshire. These were unproven allegations; no C-QUR design case was tried to a verdict.
Is there an Atrium C-QUR mesh settlement?
Yes. In December 2021, Getinge — the parent of Atrium Medical — announced a settlement reported at about $66 million to resolve more than 3,000 C-QUR claims in MDL 2753. It was reached without any admission of wrongdoing and is administered through a court-approved qualified settlement fund, with a special master valuing individual claims on a point matrix. Terms are confidential, and there is no public claim form on this page.
Which Atrium C-QUR products were named in the litigation?
The litigation involved Atrium's Omega-3-coated C-QUR mesh line, including C-QUR, C-QUR V-Patch, C-QUR TacShield, C-QUR Mosaic, C-QUR FX (CentriFX), C-QUR Edge, and C-QUR Film. Eligibility depended on the specific device implanted and the complications a patient experienced.
Did the FDA take action against Atrium C-QUR mesh?
Yes. The FDA issued a warning letter to Atrium's Hudson, New Hampshire plant in 2012 citing manufacturing and quality-system deficiencies, and in 2015 a federal court entered a consent decree of permanent injunction against Maquet/Atrium that halted manufacture and distribution of devices from that facility until it came into compliance. That regulatory history is separate from the plaintiffs' product-liability allegations.
Can I still file an Atrium C-QUR mesh claim?
The global settlement is in a close-out phase and the MDL is winding down — pending cases fell through 2026. There is no public claim form and no OCA claim to file here. Anyone who believes they were injured by a C-QUR device and has not yet acted should speak with a qualified attorney promptly, because statutes of limitations vary by state and an existing settlement program can affect deadlines.
Related Mass Torts & Sources
• Bard & Davol hernia mesh lawsuit (MDL 2846) — the largest hernia mesh MDL, with a reported billion-dollar-plus Becton Dickinson settlement framework.• Covidien / Parietex hernia mesh lawsuit (MDL 3029) — a companion hernia mesh MDL against Medtronic's Covidien, with its first bellwether underway.
• Bard PowerPort implanted-catheter lawsuit — a separate implanted-device MDL over an alleged catheter defect.
Primary sources: the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) pending-MDL statistics and its December 2016 transfer order; the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire MDL 2753 docket and settlement documents; and the FDA/DOJ 2015 consent decree of permanent injunction against Maquet/Atrium.
Important Disclosures
This page is for general informational purposes and does not constitute medical or legal advice. You should consult a qualified attorney about your individual situation. OpenClassActions.com is not a law firm and is not a claims administrator, and this page does not create an attorney-client relationship.Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
