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.


New York Sues Trump Administration Over Offshore Wind Project Freeze Impacting Clean Energy Goals
HKEX’s Permissive IPO Rules Could Open Opportunities for Korea to Strengthen Its Position in International Listings
DOJ Urges Judge to Block Lawmakers’ Bid for Special Master in Jeffrey Epstein Records Case
California Attorney General Orders xAI to Halt Illegal Grok Deepfake Imagery
Trump Criticizes NYSE Texas Expansion, Calls Dallas Exchange a Blow to New York
Lynas Rare Earths Shares Surge as Quarterly Revenue Jumps on Strong Prices
Publishers Seek to Join Lawsuit Against Google Over Alleged AI Copyright Infringement
Former South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol Faces Historic Court Ruling Over Failed Martial Law Attempt
Tesla, EEOC Move Toward Mediation in Racial Harassment Lawsuit
Taiwan Issues Arrest Warrant for OnePlus CEO Over Alleged Illegal Recruitment Activities
Baidu Shares Rise in Hong Kong After Apollo Go Robotaxi Launch in Abu Dhabi
OpenAI Launches Stargate Community Plan to Offset Energy Costs and Support Local Power Infrastructure
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang Plans China Visit Amid AI Chip Market Uncertainty
ICJ to Hear Landmark Genocide Case Against Myanmar Over Rohingya Crisis
Lululemon Founder Chip Wilson Escalates Proxy Fight to Remove Advent From Board 



