Natera settles class action over prenatal tests for $8.25M

A class of users claimed the genetic testing company marketed its prenatal tests as highly accurate, despite knowing they could produce false positives that may have altered how expectant people made decisions about their pregnancies.OAKLAND, Calif. (CN) — A federal judge approved Thursday a final settlement to a class of consumers who used a prenatal test that could produce a high percentage of false positives for rare genetic conditions.Genetic testing company Natera agreed to pay $8.25 million to a settlement class that consists of “all individuals in the U.S. who purchased at least one Natera noninvasive prenatal test offered under the Panorama or Vasistera names during the applicable class period.”The class action against Natera — and a similar one against Myriad Genetics — followed a 2022 New York Times report revealing such prenatal tests that screen for genetic disorders such as Down syndrome early in a pregnancy can produce a high percentage of false positives for exceedingly rare conditions.The plaintiffs said the results of the tests could affect how pregnant people make decisions about how, and if, they go through the pregnancy. The noninvasive tests Natera provides require only a blood sample, compared to more accurate, but more invasive diagnostic tests, including amniocentesis, which requires removal of amniotic fluid and cells from the uterus via a needle, and risks miscarriage and infection.The plaintiffs accused the company of violating numerous California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland and New Jersey consumer protection laws by marketing the tests as reliable indicators of fetal abnormalities, while knowing the chance of false positives.In his 18-page order, U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar found the settlement to be fair, reasonable, and adequate, with the common pre-requisites to approve a settlement. The settlement was negotiated at arm’s-length with a mediator.“The settlement provides significant recoveries for settlement class members, particularly when balanced against the risks and expenses of continuing litigation. Pursuing this case through trial would have been costly; recovery was not guaranteed; and there was a possibility of protracted appeals that could result in any class certification or final judgment being overturned,” the Barack Obama appointee wrote.The judge awarded 30% of the settlement fund, or approximately $2.4 million, for attorney fees and over $200,000 in out-of-pocket expenses. Additionally, Tigar awarded $7,500 to each of the eight class representatives.Class members that submit a claim with a proof of purchase of the test can receive up to 10% of their expenses if their costs were over $300. Claimants without proof of purchase can receive up to $30.The class period varies by state, starting with Ohio on Feb. 17, 2016, and all other states by Feb. 17, 2018.While the settlement means comes with no admission of liability by Natera, the company did agree to adding language to its website explaining that its prenatal tests are screening tests, not diagnostic tests, and that any high-risk conditions should be confirmed with actual diagnostic tests.It advises patients that a high-risk screening result should be confirmed through diagnostic testing, and it emphasizes that Natera’s NIPT products are screening tests rather than diagnostic tests.After preliminary approval of the settlement in December 2025, the settlement administrator, Simpluris, Inc., identified issues with notifying some potential class members through emails and postcards.After an investigation in March to rectify the problems, Tigar reset the settlement class deadline to submit claims or opt-out to July. The notices reached over 98% of the settlement class.“This court has seen no evidence to contradict its previous finding, and the court reconfirms it here with respect to class representatives and class counsel, who have vigorously prosecuted this action through discovery, motion practice and mediation,”Attorneys representing the class and Natera did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads