A major development has emerged in the long-running Johnson & Johnson talc litigation, marking a significant moment for tens of thousands of women who allege the company’s baby powder and other talc-based products caused their ovarian cancer. On Tuesday, a court-appointed special master recommended that plaintiffs be allowed to present expert testimony supporting a causal link between genital talc use and ovarian cancer, a decision that moves the federal cases closer to their first trial.
The recommendation was issued by retired U.S. District Judge Freda Wolfson, who evaluated whether expert testimony met federal scientific standards. The litigation, centralized in New Jersey federal court, includes more than 67,500 product liability lawsuits. These cases hinge heavily on expert evidence to establish whether Johnson & Johnson’s talc products are capable of causing cancer.
In a 658-page report, Wolfson concluded that the plaintiffs’ experts used reliable scientific methodologies and that epidemiological studies, both before and after 2020, collectively show a statistically significant association between genital talc powder use and ovarian cancer. She emphasized that the experts’ conclusions met the legal threshold required for testimony at trial, despite Johnson & Johnson’s ongoing dispute of the alleged link.
However, Wolfson sided with the company on other points, recommending the exclusion of expert testimony that attempted to link heavy metals or fragrance chemicals in the products to cancer. She also deferred rulings on several additional evidentiary issues, scheduling further hearings later this month and in early February.
The case is being overseen by U.S. District Judge Michael Shipp, who requested a reevaluation of the scientific evidence in light of updated federal rules governing expert testimony and the emergence of new research. Wolfson previously reviewed the evidence in 2020 and had then allowed expert testimony related to possible asbestos contamination, a claim Johnson & Johnson denies.
Johnson & Johnson has fought talc lawsuits for years, including multiple unsuccessful attempts to resolve the claims through bankruptcy, most recently rejected in April 2025. The company stopped selling talc-based baby powder in the U.S. in 2020, switching to cornstarch, while maintaining that its products are safe and do not cause cancer.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys hailed the recommendation as a crucial step toward accountability, while investors reacted cautiously, with Johnson & Johnson shares dipping slightly in after-hours trading. As the litigation advances, the ruling could prove pivotal in shaping the future of one of the largest mass tort cases in U.S. history.


Trump and IRS in Settlement Talks Over $10 Billion Tax Return Leak Lawsuit
Warren Buffett and Stephen Curry Charity Dinner Auction Raises $27 Million for Nonprofits
Nvidia’s China AI Chip Sales Remain Frozen Despite U.S. Approval
Coles “Down Down” Ruling Sparks Fresh Scrutiny of Australian Supermarket Pricing
U.S. Army Soldier Charged in $400K Insider Betting Scheme on Maduro Capture
Samsung Shares Drop as Labor Union Confirms Planned Strike
Nike Tariff Refund Lawsuit Sparks Consumer Backlash Over Price Increases
Trump-Xi Summit Sparks Renewed Hope for Americans Detained in China
Telefónica Q1 2026 Earnings Beat Expectations as Debt Declines and Cash Flow Improves
Judge Rules Use of Military Lawyers in Civilian Prosecutions Is Lawful
Taiwan Court Fines Tokyo Electron Unit $4.78M in Major TSMC Trade Secrets Case
Asia-Pacific Banks Brace for Rising Credit Risks Amid Iran Conflict
Argentina Court Upholds Cristina Kirchner Asset Seizure in Corruption Case
Florida Launches Criminal Probe Into OpenAI Over FSU Shooting Incident
BlackRock-Led GCC Infrastructure Partnership Targets $30 Billion Investment
US-China Trade Talks Sideline Chip Export Controls as Nvidia China Sales Draw Attention
Trump DOJ Accuses Yale Medical School of Racial Bias in Admissions 



