Moze Cowper joins plaintiffs leadership in Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator MDL

A federal judge in California appointed Cowper Law Managing Partner Moze Cowper to the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee in the Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator multidistrict litigation. The order gives Cowper a role in coordinating pretrial strategy as patients allege device-related injuries and complications.

Why it matters: - The appointment places Moze Cowper in a leadership role in litigation that could shape how claims over Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator products are handled nationwide. - The Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee will help direct pretrial work, coordinate strategy and oversee litigation projects for injured patients. - The MDL will examine alleged device failures, warnings and company knowledge, making the leadership structure important for how the case develops.

What happened: - United States District Judge Josephine L. Staton appointed Moze Cowper to the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee in In re: Boston Scientific Corporation Spinal Cord Stimulator Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3181. - The appointment was made in Pretrial Order No. 2 entered Aug. 13, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. - Cowper is one of four attorneys named to the four-member committee. - The other appointed committee members are Ashleigh Raso of Nigh Goldenberg Raso & Vaughn, Richard Hood of The Wilhite Law Firm and Trevor B. Rockstad of Davis & Crump, P.C.

The details: - The Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee will work with court-appointed Co-Lead Counsel to coordinate and manage plaintiffs’ pretrial activities. - The committee will participate in and chair litigation committees, assign and oversee projects, and handle other work needed to advance the litigation. - Judge Staton’s order also established a broader leadership structure that includes three Co-Lead Counsel, Plaintiffs’ Liaison Counsel, a Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee and a Leadership Development Committee. - The lawsuits consolidated in the MDL allege that patients implanted with Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulation systems suffered serious injuries and complications. - The litigation will examine the devices’ design, manufacture, testing, labeling, warnings and performance, along with Boston Scientific’s knowledge of reported problems. - Boston Scientific is expected to contest the allegations, and no liability determination has been made. - Spinal cord stimulators are implanted devices used to treat chronic pain by delivering electrical impulses to the spinal cord. - Reported problems associated with spinal cord stimulation systems include lead migration, lead breakage, device and battery failure, loss of effective stimulation, unintended or painful overstimulation, electrical and hardware malfunctions, infection and the need for revision or explant surgery. - FDA adverse-event reports involving Boston Scientific devices have described lead migration with pain and overstimulation, inadequate stimulation despite repeated reprogramming and implanted pulse generators requiring surgical replacement.

Between the lines: - The appointment gives Cowper a direct role in steering a high-stakes medical-device MDL involving patients who say implanted devices failed them. - The case appears to focus not just on injuries, but on whether Boston Scientific knew about reported issues and how it communicated risk to patients and doctors. - Cowper’s public comments frame the litigation as a patient-safety case centered on trust in implanted medical technology.

What's next: - The leadership team will begin organizing plaintiffs’ pretrial work and assigning litigation tasks under the court’s order. - Discovery and other pretrial proceedings will test the allegations about device design, warnings and alleged failures. - Boston Scientific is expected to continue defending the devices and disputing liability as the MDL moves forward.

The bottom line: - Cowper’s appointment signals that the Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator litigation is moving into a formal national coordination phase, with injured patients’ claims now being shaped by court-selected leadership.