The Tepezza hearing loss litigation has reached a critical juncture in early 2026, with 273 cases pending in the federal MDL and strong indications that settlement negotiations may be advancing. In a significant development, Judge Thomas Durkin recently removed all upcoming bellwether trial deadlines””previously scheduled to begin in June 2026″”without dismissing any claims, a move that legal observers interpret as a signal that the parties may be making progress toward a global resolution. Plaintiffs allege that Horizon Therapeutics (now owned by Amgen) failed to adequately warn patients that Tepezza could cause permanent hearing damage, including tinnitus and hearing loss.
For individuals who experienced hearing problems after receiving Tepezza infusions, the current litigation landscape presents both opportunity and uncertainty. Estimated settlement values range from $140,000 to $500,000 per case with favorable facts, though no official global settlement has been announced. This article examines the current status of the MDL, the timeline of how we arrived at this point, what the removal of trial dates might mean, and what plaintiffs should understand about the path forward.
Table of Contents
- What Is the Current Status of the Tepezza MDL in 2026?
- Why Were the Tepezza Bellwether Trials Removed from the Schedule?
- What Settlement Amounts Are Tepezza Plaintiffs Seeking?
- How Did Amgen Become the Defendant in the Tepezza Litigation?
- What Hearing Problems Are Tepezza Plaintiffs Reporting?
- What Should Potential Plaintiffs Know Before Filing?
- What Happens If Settlement Talks Fail?
- Conclusion
What Is the Current Status of the Tepezza MDL in 2026?
As of January 2026, 273 cases are consolidated in the Northern District of Illinois under U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin. The MDL (multidistrict litigation) structure allows federal courts to handle pretrial proceedings more efficiently when numerous plaintiffs file similar claims against the same defendant. The case count has held steady since December 2025, suggesting that the initial wave of filings may be stabilizing while attorneys evaluate new potential claims. The litigation has grown substantially since its establishment in July 2023, when only 42 cases were pending.
By December 2023, that number had risen to 71 cases; by June 2024, 120 cases; and by June 2025, 221 cases. This growth pattern reflects both increased awareness of the potential link between Tepezza and hearing damage and the FDA’s July 2023 requirement that Horizon update its warning labels to include the risk of irreversible hearing impairment. However, the relatively flat case count in recent months does not necessarily indicate that filing opportunities have closed. Statute of limitations periods vary by state, and individuals who only recently connected their hearing loss to Tepezza treatment may still have viable claims. Those considering filing should consult with an attorney to evaluate their specific circumstances and applicable deadlines.
- —
Why Were the Tepezza Bellwether Trials Removed from the Schedule?
Judge Durkin’s decision to remove all five previously scheduled bellwether trial dates has generated significant speculation within the legal community. The trials had been set to begin on June 8, 2026, with additional trials scheduled for August, September, and November 2026, and February 2027. Each trial was expected to last three to four weeks. The sudden removal of these dates””without any corresponding dismissal of claims””suggests that something substantial is happening behind the scenes. In mdl proceedings, bellwether trials serve as test cases that help both sides evaluate how juries might respond to representative claims.
Defendants often become more willing to negotiate global settlements after seeing unfavorable bellwether verdicts, while plaintiffs may temper their expectations if early trials go poorly. The removal of trial dates before any bellwether has occurred is unusual and typically indicates that settlement discussions have progressed to a point where trials may not be necessary. That said, the absence of trial dates does not guarantee a settlement is imminent. Negotiations in mass tort cases frequently experience setbacks, and the parties may still be far apart on key terms such as total settlement fund size, eligibility criteria, and individual payment structures. A status conference was scheduled for January 8, 2026, which may have provided additional clarity on the litigation’s direction. Plaintiffs should remain prepared for the possibility that trials could be rescheduled if talks break down.
- —
What Settlement Amounts Are Tepezza Plaintiffs Seeking?
Legal analysts estimate that individual Tepezza settlements could range from $140,000 to $500,000 per case, depending on the strength of each plaintiff’s evidence and the severity of their injuries. Cases involving documented permanent hearing loss, supported by audiological testing before and after treatment, would likely fall at the higher end of this range. Plaintiffs who experienced temporary symptoms or who lack robust medical documentation may receive less. The wide range reflects the inherent variability in mass tort compensation.
Unlike class action lawsuits where all members receive identical payments, MDL settlements typically use tiered structures that account for factors such as age, degree of impairment, impact on quality of life, and strength of causation evidence. A 45-year-old professional musician who suffered profound bilateral hearing loss after Tepezza would likely receive substantially more than a 70-year-old retiree with mild tinnitus and pre-existing hearing issues. Parties have been directed to participate in settlement talks at least once every quarter, indicating ongoing judicial pressure to reach resolution. However, plaintiffs should understand that estimated values are projections based on comparable litigation outcomes, not guarantees. The actual settlement structure””if one materializes””may differ significantly from current estimates, and individual payments will depend on how each case is evaluated against the established criteria.
- —
How Did Amgen Become the Defendant in the Tepezza Litigation?
Amgen inherited all Tepezza-related liability when it completed its $27.8 billion acquisition of Horizon Therapeutics in September 2023. Horizon had developed and marketed Tepezza, which received FDA approval in January 2020 as the first and only medication approved specifically for thyroid eye disease. The acquisition closed just two months after the FDA required updated warning labels and the MDL was established, meaning Amgen purchased the company with full knowledge of the pending litigation. This type of liability assumption is standard in pharmaceutical acquisitions, but it creates an interesting dynamic.
Amgen, with its substantial financial resources and extensive experience defending product liability claims, may approach settlement negotiations differently than Horizon would have as a smaller company. On one hand, Amgen has the resources to fight prolonged litigation; on the other, the company may prefer to resolve the Tepezza cases efficiently to avoid distraction from its broader business operations. For plaintiffs, the corporate change is largely procedural rather than substantive. The legal claims remain the same: that the manufacturer knew or should have known about the risk of hearing damage and failed to provide adequate warnings to patients and prescribing physicians. Whether Amgen ultimately settles or proceeds to trial, the company stands in Horizon’s shoes for purposes of liability.
- —
What Hearing Problems Are Tepezza Plaintiffs Reporting?
Plaintiffs in the Tepezza litigation report a range of hearing-related injuries, from persistent tinnitus (ringing or buzzing in the ears) to moderate or severe hearing loss. Some individuals describe their symptoms as temporary, resolving weeks or months after completing treatment, while others report permanent impairment that has fundamentally altered their daily lives. The FDA’s July 2023 label update specifically warned of the risk of “irreversible” hearing damage, acknowledging that for some patients, the harm may be permanent. One limitation plaintiffs should understand is that establishing causation can be complex. Thyroid eye disease patients often have underlying Graves’ disease, which itself has been associated with hearing issues in some studies.
Defendants may argue that a plaintiff’s hearing problems stem from their underlying condition rather than from Tepezza treatment. Plaintiffs with documented normal hearing immediately before starting Tepezza””and documented impairment shortly after””will have stronger cases than those without such clear before-and-after evidence. The severity of hearing damage also varies considerably among plaintiffs. Some individuals report being unable to participate in conversations without hearing aids, while others describe constant tinnitus that disrupts sleep and concentration. These differences in severity will likely translate to different compensation tiers in any eventual settlement, making thorough medical documentation essential for maximizing potential recovery.
- —
What Should Potential Plaintiffs Know Before Filing?
Individuals considering joining the Tepezza litigation should gather comprehensive medical records documenting their treatment history and any hearing-related symptoms. Ideally, this includes audiograms from before treatment began, records of all Tepezza infusions (including dates and dosages), and post-treatment audiological evaluations. The stronger the documented timeline connecting treatment to hearing damage, the more compelling the case. For example, a plaintiff who had routine hearing tests as part of an employer wellness program before starting Tepezza, then received eight infusions over several months, and subsequently underwent audiological evaluation revealing moderate sensorineural hearing loss would have an evidence profile that clearly supports causation.
Conversely, someone who first noticed tinnitus months after completing treatment and has no baseline hearing data will face greater challenges in establishing that Tepezza was the cause. Plaintiffs should also understand that MDL litigation moves slowly. The Tepezza MDL was established in July 2023, and nearly three years later, no cases have gone to trial and no global settlement has been finalized. Even if a settlement is announced in 2026, the claims administration process””determining eligibility, evaluating individual cases, and distributing payments””can take additional months or years. Patience is essential.
- —
What Happens If Settlement Talks Fail?
Should the parties fail to reach a global settlement, bellwether trials would likely be rescheduled, and the litigation would proceed toward courtroom resolution. In this scenario, a small number of representative cases would be tried first, with the outcomes informing both sides’ positions for either renewed settlement negotiations or continued trials. This process can extend the litigation timeline significantly but also provides plaintiffs with the opportunity for potentially larger verdicts than negotiated settlements typically produce.
The tradeoff between settlement and trial is meaningful. Settlements offer certainty””a guaranteed payment amount delivered within a defined timeframe””but typically at a discount compared to what a successful trial verdict might yield. Trials offer the possibility of larger awards, including punitive damages in some jurisdictions, but carry the risk of receiving nothing if the jury finds for the defendant. Most mass tort plaintiffs ultimately prefer the certainty of settlement, but individual circumstances vary.
- —
Conclusion
The Tepezza hearing loss litigation stands at a potential turning point in early 2026, with the removal of bellwether trial dates suggesting that settlement negotiations may be advancing toward resolution. The 273 pending cases represent individuals who allege that Horizon Therapeutics (now Amgen) failed to adequately warn about the risk of permanent hearing damage from Tepezza treatment. While estimated settlement values range from $140,000 to $500,000 per case with strong facts, no official global settlement has been announced.
Those who experienced hearing loss or tinnitus after Tepezza treatment should consult with an attorney to evaluate their potential claims before applicable statutes of limitations expire. Gathering comprehensive medical documentation””particularly audiological records from before and after treatment””will be essential for any potential recovery. The coming months may bring significant developments, and affected individuals should monitor the litigation’s progress while ensuring their own legal options remain protected.