A federal jury in Arizona has awarded $40 million in compensatory damages to New Mexico plaintiff Kimberly Divelbliss in the second Bard PowerPort bellwether trial in the federal multidistrict litigation. The verdict gives plaintiffs their first major trial victory in the Bard Implanted Port Catheter MDL and adds a new point of reference as additional bellwether cases approach.

The Second Bellwether Verdict

The jury returned its verdict on September 4, 2026, after a three-week trial in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. Divelbliss alleged that her Bard implanted port catheter fractured, allowing a portion of the device to migrate to her heart and cause serious cardiac injuries.

Jurors found in favor of Divelbliss on negligent design-defect and failure-to-warn claims and awarded $40 million in compensatory damages. The jury did not award punitive damages. It also rejected claims based on an alleged manufacturing defect and fraudulent concealment.

Why This Result Matters

The result is especially significant because the first Bard PowerPort bellwether trial produced a largely defense-favorable outcome. In that earlier case, involving infection allegations, the jury found for Bard on failure-to-warn and consumer-fraud claims. However, it did not reach a unanimous verdict on the central design-defect issue.

The two trials therefore present materially different evidence and injury theories. The first bellwether centered on infection-related allegations and ended with a partial defense result and a hung jury on design defect. The second involved an alleged catheter fracture and migration to the heart, resulting in a substantial compensatory verdict for the plaintiff.

Bellwether trials do not determine the outcome or value of every claim in an MDL, but they can significantly influence how both sides assess evidence, trial risk, case valuation, and potential settlement discussions.

What Bellwether Trials Can—and Cannot—Do

Bellwether trials are selected cases intended to test legal arguments, expert testimony, injury evidence, and jury reaction before a broader group of related cases proceeds toward additional trials or potential resolution. They do not automatically establish liability for other plaintiffs, and a $40 million verdict does not create a standard settlement amount for every Bard PowerPort case.

Still, a plaintiff verdict of this size can change the practical conversation. It gives plaintiffs’ counsel a successful trial result to evaluate alongside the first bellwether outcome, while Bard and Becton Dickinson must assess the risk that similar fracture allegations could resonate with future juries.

More Bard PowerPort Trials Are Ahead

The Bard PowerPort MDL remains active, and the verdict does not resolve the broader litigation. Additional bellwether trials are currently scheduled to begin on October 13, 2026, December 1, 2026, and February 2, 2027. Those trials are expected to test further allegations and provide both sides with additional information about how juries may respond to different device, injury, and causation theories.

Looking Ahead

The Divelbliss verdict gives plaintiffs meaningful momentum heading into the next phase of the Bard PowerPort litigation. At the same time, it should be viewed in context: it is one bellwether result involving a specific plaintiff, injury history, device theory, and evidentiary record.

With more trials scheduled, the next several months may provide a clearer picture of litigation risk for both sides. For law firms, intake teams, and businesses tracking mass-tort developments, the key takeaway is that the PowerPort bellwether program now includes a substantial plaintiff verdict in addition to the first trial’s more defense-favorable outcome.

Stay Updated on Mass Tort Developments

B1 Marketing Group monitors significant legal-industry and mass-tort developments affecting law firms, claimant acquisition, intake operations, and litigation strategy. Follow our News page for additional updates.