RecordLens

Healthcare. United States

Johnson & Johnson

On 14 December 2018 J&J called a Reuters investigation on asbestos in its talc false and said its baby powder was asbestos-freeS1. In October 2019 FDA said a sample from one lot contained chrysotile asbestosS6. J&J recalled the lot but disputed the resultS2. The Third Circuit ordered dismissal of the first LTL Management bankruptcy on 30 January 2023S3. On 31 March 2025 Judge Christopher Lopez of the Texas bankruptcy court denied confirmation of the Red River Talc planS4S8. In July 2026 J&J proposed a US$5.5 billion ovarian talc resolution and repeated that studies show talc is safeS5. No court record read here makes a general finding on whether J&J talc causes cancer.

Also known as
J&J, LTL Management LLC, Red River Talc LLC, Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
Headquarters
United States
Records from
United States
Current status
Operating US healthcare company. Its subsidiary Red River Talc LLC failed to win confirmation of a prepackaged bankruptcy plan on 31 March 2025S8, and J&J said it would return to the tort systemS4. On 27 July 2026 J&J announced a proposed US$5.5 billion resolution of about 76,000 ovarian talc claims outside bankruptcy, subject to a 95% participation thresholdS5.

Scope. This record covers talc product claims and the related bankruptcy cases in the United States. It does not cover J&J's pharmaceutical or medical device litigation, opioid cases, or Kenvue as a separate company.

Claims assessed

4 claims. Scores grade the evidence for each claim, not the organization.

Cases and proceedings

Responses on record

Revision history

Source records

  1. S3Tier A In re: LTL Management, LLC, Nos. 22-2003 et al., precedential opinionUS Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Court judgment. 30 January 2023.Orders dismissal of the first LTL bankruptcy for lack of financial distress. It does not address talc safety.Link working, checked 25 October 2026
  2. S4Tier B Johnson & Johnson to Return to Tort System to Defeat Meritless Talc ClaimsJohnson & Johnson. Company statement. 31 March 2025.J&J's report of the denial of the Red River plan and its reserve reversal. The court ruling itself was not read.Link working, checked 25 October 2026
  3. S8Tier C Bankruptcy judge denies J&J settlement plan related to baby powder containing talcAssociated Press (via KSAT). Press report. 1 April 2025.Report by Michelle Chapman naming Judge Christopher Lopez of the Houston division as the judge who denied the Red River plan. It does not give a case number.Link working, checked 25 October 2026
  4. S1Tier B Statement on Reuters Talc ArticleJohnson & Johnson. Company statement. 14 December 2018.J&J's rebuttal of the Reuters report. It is the company's position, not a finding.Link working, checked 25 October 2026
  5. S2Tier B Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. to Voluntarily Recall a Single Lot of Johnson’s Baby Powder in the United StatesUS Food and Drug Administration (company announcement). Company statement. 18 October 2019.Company recall notice posted by FDA, reporting the FDA test result for one lot. FDA says it posts such notices as a public service and does not endorse the company.Link working, checked 25 October 2026
  6. S5Tier B Johnson & Johnson Announces a Proposed Resolution of Ovarian Talc LitigationJohnson & Johnson. Company statement. 27 July 2026.Announces a proposed US$5.5 billion resolution and repeats J&J's safety position. It describes the MDL order but is not a court record.Link working, checked 25 October 2026
  7. S6Tier A Baby Powder Manufacturer Voluntarily Recalls Product for AsbestosUS Food and Drug Administration. Regulator press release. 18 October 2019.FDA's own notice that a sample from lot 22318RB contained chrysotile asbestos in its cosmetics survey. It covers one lot and says a sample from another lot tested negative.Link working, checked 25 October 2026
  8. S7Tier C J&J knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby PowderReuters (via Business Insurance). Press report. 14 December 2018.Reprint credited to Reuters of the December 2018 investigation. No reporter is named on the reprint. Al Jazeera carried the same Reuters finding on the same day. It is the allegation, not a finding.Link working, checked 25 October 2026