CooperSurgical’s Defective IVF Product Destroyed Human Embryos. They Found Out From Their Customers.
TL;DR
- CooperSurgical, Inc., a Delaware corporation headquartered in Trumbull, Connecticut, manufactured a laboratory solution called Global Media, used at the final stage of IVF to grow fertilized embryos before transfer to a patient’s uterus.
- The company shipped approximately 994 defective bottles of Global Media to fertility clinics across the United States. At least 481 bottles were purchased and used on real patients’ embryos before anyone at CooperSurgical caught the problem.
- The defect: the product lacked adequate amounts of magnesium, a nutrient CooperSurgical’s own specifications required and that the company knew was critical for embryo survival.
- CooperSurgical did not discover the defect through its own quality control. It learned the product was destroying embryos from fertility clinics reporting abnormally high rates of embryo loss. By then, the damage was irreversible.
- On December 5, 2023, CooperSurgical issued an Urgent Recall Notice. A formal Class 2 Device Recall notice followed on February 14, 2024. For hundreds of patients, the recall was issued after their embryos were already gone.
- Plaintiff J.G., a resident of Middlefield, Connecticut, had all three of her fertilized embryos destroyed by the defective solution during her IVF cycle at CNY Fertility — Albany.
- CooperSurgical generated $1.2 billion in revenue from its fertility division last year, with twelve consecutive quarters of double-digit growth. It sold patients a product that destroyed what it claimed to protect.
- Claims filed: Strict Product Liability (Manufacturing Defect), Strict Product Liability (Failure to Warn), Negligence, Negligent Failure to Recall, Trespass to Chattels, and Unjust Enrichment.
J.G.’s complete story, including the moment she lost all three embryos in the final step before transfer, is in The Non-Financial Ledger. CooperSurgical’s own published words about infertility grief are documented in Legal Receipts, and they are damning.
The Product: A Solution That Was Supposed to Give Life
In vitro fertilization is one of the most punishing medical processes a person can voluntarily undergo. Daily hormone injections. Frequent invasive ultrasounds. Surgery to retrieve eggs from the ovaries. Weeks of monitoring, waiting, hoping. The average single IVF cycle costs upward of $25,000, and most insurance plans cover little to none of it. For many patients, a successful cycle is not guaranteed after one attempt. Some spend hundreds of thousands of dollars across multiple cycles. The financial and physical cost is staggering, and the emotional weight is heavier still.
After all of that, there is a five-to-seven-day window at the end of the process during which fertilized eggs must be cultured in a laboratory medium, a precisely formulated solution designed to mimic the environment of the human body and provide the nutrients embryos need to develop from a single cell into a blastocyst of approximately one hundred cells. This is the last step before transfer, the attempted pregnancy. Patients have already learned how many of their eggs fertilized. They wait, sometimes daily, for updates on how many embryos are developing. The hope is palpable and real.
CooperSurgical sells a product for exactly this stage. It is called Global Media, marketed as the “original single-step, protein-free medium for uninterrupted embryo culture,” designed for day 1 through day 5 embryo culture and transfer. The company claims it contains “energy substrates and essential amino acids to support embryo growth and development.” CooperSurgical points to 500 independent publications evaluating its media across 15 years of use. It positions Global Media as a foundational, trusted product at the center of fertility medicine in the United States.
CooperSurgical is not a small company experimenting in a garage. It describes itself as a “leading fertility and women’s health company dedicated to putting time on the side of women, babies, and families at the healthcare moments that matter most in life.” It has over 600 products related to women’s health and fertility. Its fertility division generated $1.2 billion in revenue in the year preceding this lawsuit, with twelve consecutive quarters of double-digit growth. CooperSurgical is a corporation at the top of its industry, operating in a field where precision and quality control are the literal difference between life and loss.
The class action complaint filed in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut on February 4, 2025 alleges that CooperSurgical shipped approximately 994 bottles of defective Global Media to fertility clinics throughout the United States. At least 481 of those bottles were purchased and used on patients. The defect: the product lacked adequate amounts of magnesium, a mineral the company’s own Instructions for Use identify as a required nutrient for embryo growth. Rather than supporting development, the defective solution created an environment where embryos were destroyed.
CooperSurgical did not catch this problem in its own laboratory. It did not detect the magnesium deficiency before shipping the product. It did not discover the issue through any internal quality control system. According to the complaint, CooperSurgical learned that its Global Media was destroying embryos from its customers, the fertility clinics themselves, after those clinics began reporting unexpectedly high rates of embryo loss. By the time CooperSurgical issued its Urgent Recall Notice on December 5, 2023, and a formal Class 2 Device Recall on February 14, 2024, the damage had already been done to hundreds of embryos that could not be recovered.
The Non-Financial Ledger: What the Money Can Never Account For
There is a specific kind of grief that belongs to people who have fought hard, paid enormous costs, and endured tremendous physical pain in pursuit of something they desperately want, only to have it taken away at the last possible moment by someone else’s negligence. That grief does not translate cleanly into a dollar figure, and it cannot be fully captured in a legal brief. The class action complaint tries its best, citing clinical research and medical literature. But the human reality is worth sitting with for more than a paragraph.
IVF patients, before they ever reach the embryo culturing stage, have already given an enormous amount of themselves. They have taken fertility drugs, often administered through daily injections, that cause significant hormonal disruption. They have attended frequent medical appointments, sometimes every day during active cycles, submitting to blood draws and ultrasounds to monitor follicle development. Many have undergone surgical egg retrieval procedures, which require anesthesia and recovery time. Some have experienced Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome, a potentially serious complication that can cause abdominal pain, blood clots, shortness of breath, rapid weight gain, and in severe cases requires hospitalization. The complaint notes that symptoms can last several weeks. All of this before a single embryo has been transferred.
When patients reach the culturing stage, the five-to-seven days during which Global Media does its work, they are in a place of suspended, fragile hope. They have been told how many eggs were retrieved and how many fertilized. Those numbers matter to them profoundly. Every embryo represents a chance at a pregnancy, and for some patients, due to age, health conditions, or limited ovarian reserve, those chances are finite. The complaint describes this waiting period accurately: it is dramatic, tense, and stressful. Each update from the clinic, each phone call, each number shared, carries the full weight of the journey that preceded it.
For Plaintiff J.G. and the class of patients whose embryos were destroyed by CooperSurgical’s defective Global Media, the phone call or message they received was not an update about development. It was the news that their embryos were gone. All of them, in J.G.’s case. She had three fertilized embryos, three chances, at the end of a costly, physically taxing, and emotionally burdensome process. All three were lost. The complaint says she was “devastated by the unexpected and complete loss of her embryos, which occurred in the very final stage before transfer.” The word “unexpected” carries a particular weight. This was not a natural failure of the IVF process, which patients are counseled to prepare for. This was a corporate manufacturing failure that patients had no way of anticipating, no ability to prevent, and no warning about.
The complaint documents, with clinical precision, what the research says about this kind of loss. Over 55% of women present with depression after spontaneous loss of a pregnancy. The anxiety and depression from such a loss can last well over a year. Those feelings are described as “especially intense if the pregnancy was long-awaited.” For patients who have experienced recurrent pregnancy loss, many experience severe depression and high levels of stress, and their mental health is often negatively impacted even if they subsequently achieve a pregnancy. For IVF patients specifically, who entered the process already carrying the emotional burden of infertility, the loss of an embryo at the final stage compounds a grief that was already present. The complaint notes that patients’ anxiety and distress began long before the IVF process itself, citing infertility as a significant source of emotional harm.
What makes the emotional accounting here particularly sharp is that CooperSurgical knew all of this. The company was not ignorant of the psychological stakes. According to the complaint, CooperSurgical published its own patient-facing content acknowledging that infertility and failed cycles could cause anxiety, changes in appetite and sleep, difficulty concentrating, difficulty maintaining social relationships, frequent crying, loss of interest in usual activities, mood swings, persistent feelings of sadness or guilt, preoccupation with infertility, and, in the most serious cases, suicidal thoughts or thoughts of self-harm. The company wrote about the grief of loss. It acknowledged that for women especially, the physical and emotional aspects of loss are intertwined and compounding. CooperSurgical had full awareness of the territory its product operated in. It knew the stakes for the people who depended on that product working correctly. It shipped the defective product anyway. It failed to find the problem through its own quality control. And it learned the product was destroying embryos from the people it had already harmed.
Beyond the immediate grief, these patients now face a decision no one should have to make under these circumstances: whether to attempt IVF again. That means another $25,000 or more. Another round of daily injections. Another surgical retrieval, with no guarantee of how many eggs can be retrieved, how many will fertilize, or how many embryos will develop. Some patients, depending on their age or circumstances, face the real possibility that a repeat cycle will yield fewer embryos or none at all. The complaint explicitly acknowledges this: “Even those who do repeat IVF face the chance that no eggs will be retrieved or fertilized.” The embryos destroyed by CooperSurgical’s defective media were not simply products. For many of these patients, they represented the best or only biological pathway to parenthood. The destruction of those embryos was, for some, the destruction of that pathway entirely.
Legal Receipts: Directly From the Court Filing
Every quote below is pulled verbatim from the class action complaint filed in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, Case No. 3:25-cv-00172. No paraphrasing. No embellishment. These are the allegations on the record.
“On December 5, 2023, those patients learned why. CooperSurgical’s Global Media had been shipped to fertility clinics throughout the United States with a serious and consequential defect. Rather than providing the nutrients and environment required for embryo growth, CooperSurgical’s defective Global Media created an environment where embryos would, instead, be destroyed.” Complaint ¶7, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“CooperSurgical, however, breached that duty, failing to inspect the nearly 1,000 bottles of its defective Global Media that were manufactured and prepared for use on fertility patients’ embryos. Indeed, CooperSurgical failed to identify the issue on its own at all, becoming aware that its Global Media was destroying embryos from its customers.” Complaint ¶11, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“According to regulatory authorities, CooperSurgical issued the recall due to inadequate amounts of magnesium that impaired growth of the embryos to the blastocyst stage. CooperSurgical knew or should have known that magnesium is a critical nutrient required in any culture medium used to develop embryos. It, furthermore, should have known that a lack of magnesium in the Global Media would destroy or irreparably impair the embryos.” Complaint ¶41, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“CooperSurgical failed to properly test or inspect the impacted lots of Global Media. Consequently, approximately 994 bottles of culture medium were affected and 481 bottles of culture medium were purchased by clinics and used across the United States.” Complaint ¶43, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“As one practitioner explains, ‘[l]osing a pregnancy is losing a child’ and the anxiety and depression from such a loss can last well over a year. Furthermore, those ‘feelings can be especially intense if the pregnancy was long-awaited.'” Complaint ¶47, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“Over 55% of women present with depression after spontaneous loss of a pregnancy, exacerbating the pain and suffering IVF patients likely experienced from their difficulties with infertility. For those who have experienced recurrent pregnancy loss, many experience severe depression and high levels of stress and their mental health is often negatively impacted even if they obtain a subsequent pregnancy.” Complaint ¶48, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“CooperSurgical understood the emotional trauma of failed pregnancies and infertility. In its blog, CooperSurgical wrote that ‘[f]ertility issues can affect your self-esteem, relationship, your emotional well-being and may even cause depression.’ CooperSurgical noted that ‘[n]egative pregnancy tests, failed cycles’ can lead to a host of harms and it listed several, including: (1) anxiety or feeling of anxiousness; (2) changes in appetite, weight, or sleep patterns; (3) difficulty concentrating; (4) difficulty maintaining social relationships; (5) frequently crying; (6) loss of appetite; (7) loss of interest in usual activities and relationships; (8) mood swings; (9) persistent feelings of sadness or guilt; (10) preoccupations with infertility; (11) suicidal thoughts or thoughts of self-harm.” Complaint ¶50, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“CooperSurgical further noted that ‘[e]specially for women, not only do they have to deal with their grief and come to terms with the miscarriage, but they also have to manage the physical aspect of their loss.’ CooperSurgical’s defective solution, however, imposed the same harm, emotional loss, and grief on Plaintiff and the Class.” Complaint ¶51, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“CooperSurgical acted willfully, wantonly, and with a conscious disregard for the safety of fertility patients, like Plaintiff and the Class, who CooperSurgical knew would submit their embryos for culturing using the Global Media. This is especially true because CooperSurgical knew of the substantial and harmful consequences of unsafe culturing media on the survival of the embryo and the emotional and financial health of the fertility patients.” Complaint ¶101, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“Plaintiff and the Class did not consent to or authorize the use of faulty and defective culturing media on their developing embryos.” Complaint ¶119, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“Although CooperSurgical represented that its Global Media would help promote the development of embryonic growth, it did the opposite, destroying, damaging, and impairing the viability of the embryos.” Complaint ¶127, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“Permitting CooperSurgical to retain the benefit it received from the sale and purchase of its defective Global Media would be unjust and inequitable.” Complaint ¶129, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“CooperSurgical is strictly liable to Plaintiff and the Class for harm caused by manufacturing defects in its culture media… The Global Media was defective and, thus, unable to fulfill its express purpose of adequately culturing embryos for use in pregnancy.” Complaint ¶¶67, 70, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“CooperSurgical’s Global Media, however, was defective and unreasonably dangerous when it left CooperSurgical’s possession because it did not contain adequate warnings, including warnings concerning the risk of defect that its formulation lacked sufficient magnesium and would stop embryo development.” Complaint ¶81, Case 3:25-cv-00172
“CooperSurgical negligently recalled the defective Global Media by failing to timely implement the recall. CooperSurgical knew or reasonably should have known that its Global Media would damage or destroy embryos if the Global Media was not consistent with CooperSurgical’s specifications and lacked adequate nutrients or an appropriate pH balance to facilitate embryo growth.” Complaint ¶107, Case 3:25-cv-00172
The “Cost of a Life” Metric
CooperSurgical’s fertility division revenue in the year of the recall. Twelve consecutive quarters of double-digit growth.
Against this: hundreds of embryos irreparably destroyed. Each representing a $25,000+ IVF cycle. Each representing a human being’s last, best hope for a biological child.
Put those numbers together. CooperSurgical pulled in over a billion dollars from fertility products in a single year. It shipped nearly a thousand bottles of a product with a manufacturing defect it did not catch through its own testing. Those bottles were used on real people who had already spent tens of thousands of dollars and endured significant physical and emotional strain. The company learned its product was destroying embryos from the clinics reporting unexpectedly high loss rates. Then it issued a recall. The recall was too late for the people already harmed, and the billion-dollar revenue figure did not decrease.
Societal Impact Mapping
This case is a single lawsuit filed by a single named plaintiff on behalf of a class of patients. But the circumstances it describes sit inside a much larger landscape. What happened here, a corporation prioritizing revenue over rigorous quality control in a high-stakes medical product market, has consequences that extend beyond the individual patients directly affected. Below, we map three dimensions of harm that this case illuminates.
Environmental Degradation
The complaint does not make direct environmental claims, and this investigation will not fabricate them. However, the industrial context matters. The manufacture of precision pharmaceutical-grade laboratory media at the scale CooperSurgical operates, hundreds of products, hundreds of thousands of units, is an industrial process. When quality control fails at this scale, the result is not just product that harms patients. It is product that must be recalled, quarantined, and disposed of. Approximately 994 bottles of defective Global Media were identified in this recall. The management of recalled biological and pharmaceutical products, including specialized embryo culture media containing specific chemical and nutrient formulations, generates waste that must be handled according to regulatory standards.
More broadly, the failure of quality control systems in specialized medical manufacturing reflects a broader pattern of industrial corners being cut when oversight is inadequate. The complaint alleges CooperSurgical failed to implement the quality control measures necessary to ensure product safety, and that the company only learned of the defect after patient harm occurred at scale. When manufacturing systems are not adequately monitored or tested, the failure modes are not isolated events. They are systemic. The IVF industry depends on a supply chain of precision chemical products. Quality failures in that chain produce cascading harms, including waste, resource consumption for repeated cycles that would not have been necessary absent the defect, and the institutional erosion of trust in the safety frameworks that are supposed to protect patients.
Public Health
The public health implications of this case are direct and documented. The complaint draws on published clinical and medical literature to establish that the loss of embryos at the final stage of IVF carries severe psychological consequences. Over 55% of women present with depression following spontaneous pregnancy loss. For those with recurrent pregnancy loss, severe depression and high stress levels persist even after a subsequent successful pregnancy. The complaint cites research from the National Institutes of Health and multiple peer-reviewed studies to establish that this mental health burden is real, measurable, and lasting, in many cases extending well beyond a year from the loss event.
The complaint also identifies the physical health dimension. IVF treatment itself carries medical risks. Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome, a complication of the hormone medications required to stimulate egg development, can cause abdominal bloating, blood clots, shortness of breath, rapid weight gain, and in severe cases, death. Patients who must repeat an IVF cycle because their embryos were destroyed by CooperSurgical’s defective media are re-exposed to all of these risks. Each additional cycle is another round of hormone injections, another retrieval surgery, another period of monitoring and waiting. The complaint explicitly acknowledges that even repeat attempts carry no guarantee of success: “Even those who do repeat IVF face the chance that no eggs will be retrieved or fertilized.” The public health cost of forcing people to undergo additional unnecessary medical procedures due to a manufacturing failure is not abstract. It is measured in bodies, in syringes, in hospital visits, and in grief.
The complaint also situates this within a larger public health context. Infertility affects approximately 9% of men and 11% of women of reproductive age in the United States. Approximately 10% of couples are estimated to be unable to conceive naturally, and that figure increases with age. Some studies cited in the complaint suggest infertility rates are increasing, partly because couples are having children later. The rate of infertility for women aged 30 to 39 is nearly double the rate for women under 30. As of 2017, over 1 million babies had been born in the United States through IVF or other assisted reproductive technologies. IVF is described in the complaint as the “first line therapy for all causes of infertility.” A corporation selling a compromised product at the center of the leading fertility treatment for an increasingly affected population is not a niche product liability story. It is a public health event.
The complaint also specifically addresses the use of IVF for genetic screening purposes. Some patients use IVF not because they are infertile, but to prevent passing on fatal or severely debilitating genetic conditions to their children. The complaint names Krabbe Leukodystrophy, Tay-Sachs disease, and Huntington’s disease as examples. For a patient using IVF specifically to avoid passing a fatal genetic condition to a child, the destruction of tested, viable embryos by a defective culture medium represents a harm that goes beyond the emotional and financial. It potentially closes a medically and ethically specific window that cannot be reopened simply by spending more money.
Economic Inequality
IVF is a treatment that costs upward of $25,000 per cycle, with little to no insurance coverage for most patients in the United States. The complaint states this plainly and does not hedge it: “little to none of the medical costs associated with IVF are covered by insurance.” Some patients also incur additional costs for genetic testing of embryos, or other surgical procedures. And because IVF frequently requires multiple cycles before a successful pregnancy, “patients in some cases incur hundreds of thousands of dollars in IVF treatment costs in hopes of achieving a pregnancy.” These are not wealthy people playing a luxury medical game. These are people who want to have children, who face biological barriers to doing so, and who are spending money they may not have on treatments that are the leading clinical option available to them.
When CooperSurgical’s defective Global Media destroyed these patients’ embryos, it did not destroy a product. It destroyed the financial value of the entire cycle that produced those embryos. Every dollar spent on medications, monitoring appointments, surgical retrieval, fertilization procedures, and laboratory costs leading up to the culturing stage was wasted. The complaint frames this explicitly as an economic harm: patients “suffered, among other things: (1) loss in the economic value of their IVF treatment, which was undermined by the damage to and destruction of the embryos obtained through IVF; (2) loss of their embryos and the opportunity for a potential pregnancy; (3) emotional harm and distress from the loss of the embryos; and (4) incurred additional financial costs for further fertility or mental health treatment.”
The economic inequality embedded in this harm is structural. People with wealth and flexible employment can absorb the cost of an additional IVF cycle more easily than people without those resources. For lower-income patients who stretched financially to afford a single cycle, the destruction of their embryos does not just delay parenthood. It may end it. The decision to attempt another cycle is not purely a medical one. It is a financial one, shaped by whether a patient can access another $25,000 or more, take more time off work for daily medical appointments, and sustain the physical and emotional toll of the process again. CooperSurgical’s negligence did not affect all patients equally. It fell hardest on those who had the least room to absorb the loss.
Meanwhile, CooperSurgical generated $1.2 billion in revenue from its fertility division in the year of the recall. The economic asymmetry is stark. A corporation earning over a billion dollars from products used in fertility treatment shipped a defective product that it did not test adequately, discovered the defect only after clinics reported patient harm, issued a recall after the damage was done, and retained the revenue it earned from selling the defective product. The complaint’s unjust enrichment claim directly addresses this: it alleges that “any benefit CooperSurgical obtained from the sale and purchase of its defective Global Media was unfairly and wrongfully obtained.” The patients paid. CooperSurgical profited. The embryos were destroyed. That is the economic ledger of this case.
Explore by category
Product Safety Violations
When companies sell dangerous goods, consumers pay the price.
View Cases →Financial Fraud & Corruption
Lies, scams, and executive impunity that distort markets.
View Cases →Related posts:
Benzene in Acne Medicine | Harvard Drug Group (Major Rugby Pharmaceuticals)
How SharkNinja’s Negligence Scarred 106 Consumers for Life. Literally.
Security Building Loft Partners Paid Just $21,374 For Endangering Tenants With Lead Paint
Geronimo Concrete potentially exposed elementary school children to lead paint.
