FIGHTING FOR TRUTH IN INFERTILITY: Why We Filed Seven Class Actions Over PGT-A Testing
By Allison Freeman, JD, Managing partner of Constable Law and the IVF Advocate. She can be contacted through the editorial office of The Reproductive Times.
In the last quarter of 2024 several class action consumer lawsuits were filed shortly before the Annual Scientific Meeting of the ASRM (in Denver, CO), “class action” became the buzzword of the conference. Now almost a year later, things have calmed down but the work on both sides of the case is, of course, continuing and the interest in these cases in the IVF community has remained high. When Allison Freeman, the lead attorney in all of these cases, therefore, offered an article explaining her personal motivations for filing these cases, we, of course, could not resist. And here is the piece unedited, as she submitted it.
Our litigation team made up of Constable Law, Berger Montague and Justice Law Collaborative has filed seven class action consumer protection lawsuits based upon the false and misleading claims made to sell PGT-A testing to consumers.
The seven lawsuits are as follows:
- Weinberg, et.al. v. CooperGenomics, Inc. and CooperSurgical, Inc., which was filed September 27, 2024 in the District of New Jersey
- Donamaria v. Reproductive Genetic Innovations, Inc., which was filed October 4, 2024 in the Northern District of Illinois
- Cruz, et.al. v. Progenesis, Inc., which was filed October 7, 2024 in the Southern District of California
- Petersen, et.al. v. Natera, Inc., which was filed October 8, 2024 in the Northern District of California
- Klosowski, et.al. v. FPG Labs, LLC d/b/a Ovation Fertility, US Genetic Lab, LLC d/b/a Ovation Genetics, and US Fertility, LLC, which was filed October 31, 2024 in the District of Delaware
- M.M., et.al. v. Igenomix USA, Inc., Vitrolife Group, Vitrolife AB, and Vitrolife, Inc., which was filed March 4, 2025 in the Southern District of Florida
- Tyman, et.al. v. CCRM Parent Holdings, Inc., CCRM Practice, LLC, and CCRM Management Company Holdings, LP, which was filed May 7, 2025 in the District of Colorado
The lawsuits allege consumer fraud, breach of warranty, and related causes of action arising out of defendants’ advertising and sale of PGT-A testing. Specifically, the lawsuits allege that PGT-A is scientifically unproven, inaccurate, and lacks proper validation, yet has been aggressively marketed using a host of false and misleading claims. These claims include that PGT-A testing is 97 to 99% accurate, increases the success of IVF, decreases the chance of miscarriage, leads to a higher chance of pregnancy, increases live birth rate, increases the chance of implantation and pregnancy, and reduces the time and cost of pregnancy. The lawsuit against CCRM also includes causes of action related to CCRM’s interference with patients’ embryos.
These lawsuits were not filed quickly. In fact, I began investigating and researching PGT-A more than two years before the first suit was ever filed. It all started with my own experience. When I first heard about a test that claimed to increase my chances of having a healthy baby through IVF, it sounded too good to be true, so I declined. A couple of years later, when I began IVF again, the push for PGT-A had only intensified. I was bombarded with cartoon videos, promotional webinars, and follow-up phone calls, all promising results that, once again, felt too good to believe so I passed a second time.
Still, I kept questioning my decision, especially after a representative from one testing company told me that not buying the test at my age was “insane.” At the same time, I started hearing similar stories from friends and family. People were telling me they’d lost embryos because of PGT-A results and were not allowed to decide what to do with their embryos.
That was the turning point. I couldn’t ignore the growing number of voices or the unsettling questions I had about how a single test had come to hold so much power over people’s fertility journeys.
I started reading and investigating everything I could relate to PGT-A, including science journals, clinical studies, articles, and even message board posts from others in the fertility community. I would fall asleep only to wake up in the middle of the night with another question I wanted to look into, which would lead to more reading and investigating at all hours of the night. Eventually, I had gathered enough information to believe there was a serious issue with the way PGT-A was being marketed and sold to IVF patients across the country. However, I wanted to be sure.
At that point, I decided to bring my concerns to my law partner. Since he had no personal experience with IVF or fertility treatment, I knew he could offer a fresh, unbiased perspective that wasn’t clouded by the emotional weight I carried. I shared my notes, my research, and my questions with him. After digging into the material, he agreed that something didn’t add up, but he also wanted to be certain. So together, we began reaching out to experts.
We spoke with reproductive endocrinologists, genetic counselors, molecular biologists, embryologists, bioethicists and anyone willing to talk to us about PGT-A. Again and again, we heard the same message that PGT-A is being sold to consumers with misleading claims and without the solid scientific backing those claims demand. It became clear that the test was being marketed in ways that were false, misleading and unsupported by science, but the question then became what could we do about it?
Although I’m a lawyer, filing lawsuits wasn’t my first instinct. I started by reaching out to those in positions of oversight and influence. I wrote to my state attorney, the FDA, and the FTC. I also contacted a few state senators and representatives who I believed might take interest in the issue. Most never responded and the few who did made it clear that they wouldn’t be getting involved.
That’s when we realized litigation might be our only path forward. But tackling an issue of this scale with scientific complexity that affects countless individuals meant we couldn’t go it alone. We joined forces with dedicated co-counsel firms who share our passion and dedication. Together, we’re not just suing to hold the defendants liable but also to hopefully create real change.
Since filing, we have received four motions to dismiss and one motion for judgment on the pleadings which are legal attempts by the testing labs to have the cases thrown out before any evidence is reviewed. Their position is that the lawsuits lack a legal basis to move forward. Ultimately, that decision rests with the court.
Responses are not yet due in the two most recent cases, which were filed against Igenomix/Vitrolife and CCRM. However, Vitrolife has acknowledged the filing publicly, stating that it is aware of the lawsuit and is reviewing the matter with its legal counsel.
Every day, we hear from IVF patients whose voices carry both pain and hope. They thank us for filing these lawsuits and tell us they’re searching for something simple but powerful: truth, transparency, and change. That is what drives us forward.
The fertility journey is one of the most personal, emotional, and vulnerable paths someone can walk. These are people already facing enormous hurdles—physically, emotionally, and financially—just to try and grow their families. They deserve better. We see them. We hear them. And we are fighting for them—not just when it comes to PGT-A testing, but in the face of anything that misleads, harms, or obscures the truth from those seeking to build a family.
EDITORIAL COMMENT
Of course impartial in all of these lawsuits, The Reproductive Times, welcomes opposing opinions to the here presented article.