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.


TikTok, DOJ Reach $400 Million Children’s Privacy Settlement
US Court Approves airBaltic Chapter 11 Restructuring
US Judge Dismisses Imran Ahmed Deportation Lawsuit
29 US states are suing Meta. What might it mean for the rest of the world?
Rodrigo Duterte Makes First Public Appearance at ICC in 18 Months
Ex-Google DeepMind Researcher Warns AI Could Pose Existential Threat
UN Chief Raises Concern Over US Sanctions on ICC Officials
Samsung, SK Hynix Reject KEPCO’s $18.7 Billion Power Funding Plan
Meta Agrees to $18 Billion Settlement, Tightens Teen Social Media Rules
OpenAI Agents Linked to RubyGems Cyberattack
CK Hutchison Seeks $1.5 Billion From Panama Over Canal Ports
Australia’s Corporate Leaders Face Parliament Over KPMG Client Data Scandal
Amazon Shares Fall as FTC Plans Ad Pricing Lawsuit
Nvidia Eyes $10 Billion Investment in Anthropic IPO
Ares Names James Garforth Principal for Asia Direct Lending
SEC Seeks ISS Client Voting Records in Proxy Adviser Probe
SoftBank Shares Jump 8% as SB Energy IPO Optimism Builds 



