A proposed class action lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against CCRM Fertility and its parent company, CCRM Parent Holdings Inc., alleging that the fertility clinic chain engaged in fertility fraud by aggressively marketing unreliable genetic tests that resulted in wasted embryos and emotional harm to thousands of patients across the United States.
Filed on behalf of plaintiffs from Illinois, New York, and Colorado, the 74-page complaint accuses CCRM of promoting its preimplantation genetic testing (PGT-A) as a scientifically proven method to reduce miscarriage risk and increase the chances of a successful pregnancy. However, the suit alleges that CCRM knew these claims were unsubstantiated and that the tests were, in fact, bogus.
The lawsuit cites multiple peer-reviewed studies — including a 2018 article by Dr. Peter Braude of King’s College London — that question the validity of PGT-A testing. Medical professionals have raised concerns that these tests not only fail to improve IVF outcomes, but may also lead to the unnecessary discarding of viable embryos, particularly harming patients with diminished ovarian reserves.
“Patients placed their trust and hopes in CCRM, only to be misled into purchasing expensive tests that science does not support,” said attorney Allison S. Freeman of Constable Law PA. “This lawsuit aims to bring accountability and answers to those affected by these practices.”
PGT-A testing, which involves embryo biopsy and freezing, has become increasingly common in fertility treatment. The complaint alleges that these procedures can damage embryos, and that CCRM’s claims of 95–98% accuracy and increased live birth rates were exaggerated or false.
According to the suit, patients paid thousands of dollars out-of-pocket for these add-on tests, believing they were making informed medical decisions. The complaint seeks certification of a nationwide class as well as state-specific subclasses in New York and Colorado.
The legal claims include fraud, concealment, breach of warranty, unjust enrichment, and violations of state consumer protection laws. Plaintiffs are seeking compensatory, statutory, and punitive damages, as well as restitution and disgorgement of profits.
The case is Stacy Tyman et al. v. CCRM Parent Holdings Inc. et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-01425
