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.


SpaceX Surpasses Amazon in Market Value as Post-IPO Rally Accelerates
Chinese Social Media Giant Xiaohongshu Eyes Hong Kong IPO at Over $70 Billion Valuation
U.S. Supreme Court Allows Alabama’s Republican-Backed Congressional Map for 2026 Elections
Carro Expands Into Australia With Acquisition of Used-Car Platform CarPlace
Colombia Opens New Investigation Into Former President Álvaro Uribe Over Paramilitary Allegations
John Jumper Leaves Google DeepMind for Anthropic Amid Intensifying AI Talent Race
Frank Stronach Found Guilty of Sexual Assault and Indecent Assault in Ontario Court
Hyundai to Acquire SoftBank’s Remaining Boston Dynamics Stake for $325 Million
Trump Administration Delays DeepSeek and CXMT Trade Blacklist Designations Amid U.S.-China Tensions
Trump Lawyers Face Scrutiny After Missing Deadline in $10 Billion BBC Defamation Lawsuit
Jio IPO Filing Nears as Reliance Targets $4 Billion Market Debut
DOJ Sues Virginia Over Law Enforcement Mask Ban
BHP Shares Fall as Jansen Potash Project Costs Surge
HSBC Australia Faces A$35M Penalty Over Scam Protection Failures
US Raises Concerns Over Possible ASML EUV Machine Transfer to China 



