MDL TrackerProducts Liability

Gardasil

MDL No. 3036  ·  U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina
MDL No.
3036
Docket Type
Products Liability
Transferee Judge
Hon. Kenneth D. Bell
Centralized
2022-08-04
Actions Pending
6
As Of
2026-09-01
Funding Considerations

This docket consolidates claims that the HPV vaccine Gardasil caused autoimmune or other adverse health conditions in recipients, centralized in August 2022 before Judge Kenneth D. Bell in the Western District of North Carolina. With just 6 actions pending against 258 total filed, the docket has resolved or dismissed the overwhelming majority of its original filing population, leaving a small residual population — a profile suggesting the litigation encountered a significant early attrition event, whether through an adverse ruling on general causation, a settlement wave, or another mechanism not disclosed by the pending-action count alone.

For a funder, a docket at this stage looks fundamentally different from its earlier, larger-volume phase. There is no meaningful portfolio-finance opportunity remaining given how few actions are still active, and any funding interest would need to focus narrowly on the specific facts of a remaining claim — why it survived whatever process reduced the broader population from 258 to 6, and what that implies about its individual causation and damages strength relative to the claims that did not survive.

Medical-lien considerations remain relevant in principle for any surviving personal-injury claim tied to vaccine-related autoimmune or neurological conditions, given the potential for ongoing treatment costs, but the more pressing diligence question for a claim this late in the docket's lifecycle is understanding its specific procedural posture. A law firm holding one of the six remaining claims is better served by individual case evaluation than treating it as part of a larger portfolio opportunity that no longer exists at scale. Criterica Capital's mass tort finance line can evaluate an individual claim of this kind, and a structural brief on this docket's attrition history is available through Criterica Intelligence.

Frequently Asked Questions
Is there meaningful funding volume in the Gardasil MDL today?
+
Why did this docket shrink so much from its original filing population?
+
Do medical liens apply to a remaining Gardasil claim?
+
What financing approach fits a remaining claim here?
+

Pre-settlement funding is a non-recourse purchase of a portion of the proceeds of a pending legal claim — not a loan. If the case does not result in a recovery, nothing is owed. Rates, fees, and repayment terms are disclosed in full in the funding agreement, which the applicant’s attorney reviews before signing. Availability and terms vary by state.

Litigation structure and resolution-risk brief on Criterica Intelligence →
Holding Gardasil claims or inventory?
Send the details and our institutional team will respond within one business day.