Smith & Nephew Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) Hip Implant

The Smith & Nephew Birmingham Hip Resurfacing docket presents an unusual funding picture: the JPML's most recent report shows zero actions currently pending in the coordinated proceeding, even though the litigation historically involved a substantial claim population alleging that this metal-on-metal hip resurfacing system caused elevated metal-ion levels, tissue damage, and revision surgery. For a funder, that zero-pending status is the single most important fact here. It indicates that the MDL-stage inventory has fully wound down, whether through settlement, dismissal, or remand of every previously coordinated action.

That does not necessarily mean no BHR-related claims exist anywhere in the legal system; it means there is no active federal MDL inventory to originate new funding against as of this report. Any funding conversation involving a BHR claim today would need to start by confirming where that specific claim currently sits procedurally, since it would not be found within this coordinated proceeding, and could involve a state-court matter, a claim resolved through an earlier settlement mechanism, or a claim outside the federal court system entirely.

Because there is no active MDL-stage inventory to underwrite here, this docket is not a source of new deal flow for either single-matter or portfolio financing at this time. If new BHR-related actions were to be filed and transferred into this MDL, that would represent a meaningful change to the docket's status worth revisiting with fresh diligence.

Criterica Intelligence's structural read on this docket's wind-down is the more relevant resource for a firm trying to understand what happened to a historical BHR claim population, ahead of any funding conversation about a specific surviving claim located elsewhere in the system.

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.