Published
December 19, 2025
Updated
September 29, 2026
Buyers of Tampax Pearl and Tampax Radiant tampons are suing Procter & Gamble over alleged lead in the tampons, and a federal judge certified a California class in the lead case on September 29, 2026. There is still no settlement or claim form to file.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes active class action litigation. The statements below are unproven allegations. Procter & Gamble has not been found liable. A California class was certified on September 29, 2026, but that is not a finding of wrongdoing, and there is no settlement and nothing to claim at this time. There has been no court finding that any Tampax product is unsafe. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
September 2026 Update: Class Certified
On September 29, 2026, Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel certified a class in the main California case, Barton v. The Procter & Gamble Company, No. 3:24-cv-01332. The class covers California citizens who bought any size of Tampax Pearl or Tampax Radiant tampons in California from July 29, 2020 through the date class notice is sent, and who do not claim a personal injury. It was certified both for money and for a possible court order on the labels. The judge also granted only in part P&G's motion to exclude the plaintiff's survey expert.Certification is not a ruling that the tampons are unsafe or that P&G misled anyone, and there is still no settlement, claim form or deadline. A mandatory settlement conference is scheduled for December 10, 2026. Read the full story and what it means for the case: Tampax lead lawsuit certified as a class action for California buyers, or read the class certification order (PDF).
Status
Class Certified
California class certified Sept. 29, 2026 · not a settlement
Main Case
Barton v. P&G
No. 3:24-cv-01332 · S.D. Cal. · Tampax Pearl & Tampax Radiant
Can I Claim?
No — nothing to claim yet
No settlement fund, no claim form, no deadline
What's the Tampax Tampons Lead Contamination Lawsuit?
A class action lawsuit alleges certain Tampax tampons may contain lead and that Procter & Gamble did not clearly disclose that information to consumers. The court has not ruled in favor of either side and Procter & Gamble denies wrongdoing.This page is about active class action litigation, not a settlement. That means there is no payout and no claim form available right now because there is no settlement.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
Where Does the Case Stand?
The main case is Barton v. The Procter & Gamble Company, No. 3:24-cv-01332, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, with Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel assigned and Magistrate Judge Steve B. Chu referred. Key procedural milestones so far:• Feb. 13, 2025: The court granted in part and denied in part P&G's motion to dismiss, allowing plaintiffs to amend. Some pleading theories were narrowed, but the case was not fully dismissed.
• Dec. 11, 2025: The court denied P&G's motion to transfer the California case to the Southern District of Ohio. The order describes consumer protection claims alleging P&G misled consumers regarding the safety of Tampax Pearl and Tampax Radiant tampons.
• Aug. 8, 2025: A second motion to dismiss was granted in part and denied in part; P&G answered the amended complaint on Aug. 22, 2025.
• May 13, 2026: The plaintiff moved to certify a California class; P&G opposed and moved to exclude the plaintiff's survey expert. The motions were argued on July 31, 2026.
• Aug. 26, 2026: The court rejected most requests to keep class-certification exhibits under seal as overbroad and ordered narrower redaction requests.
• Sept. 29, 2026: The court certified the California class and granted the expert motion only in part.
Because the case has already survived part of P&G's dismissal motion and a venue challenge, it is in a stronger posture than a brand-new filing. With a certified class, it is now the most advanced Tampax lead case, but it is still active litigation, not a settlement.
Related Cases
The December 2025 transfer order references a related Illinois case, Foster v. The Procter & Gamble Co., No. 1:25-cv-09735, filed by the same counsel as the California case, and an Ohio case, Sanchez v. The Procter & Gamble Co., No. 1:25-cv-00852, filed November 19, 2025 by plaintiffs from nine states.The Sanchez case was voluntarily dismissed on January 14, 2026. On January 23, 2026, the same plaintiffs other than the California buyer filed Otkina v. The Procter & Gamble Company, No. 1:26-cv-00773, in the Northern District of Illinois. It seeks a nationwide class that excludes California, a multi-state consumer protection class and state subclasses. No class has been certified in any of these other cases.
Which Tampax Products Are Involved?
The main California Barton case and the December 2025 order specifically concern Tampax Pearl and Tampax Radiant tampons, including (but not limited to) Tampax Pearl sizes such as Light, Regular, Super, Super Plus, and Ultra.Important: Tampax Pure Cotton is tied more closely to separate chemical-exposure litigation and should not be assumed to be part of the lead case unless a specific complaint names it. If you are checking your own products, the lead allegations in the main California case center on Tampax Pearl and Tampax Radiant.
What Evidence Is There, and What Does the FDA Say?
At this stage there is no court finding that Tampax tampons are unsafe or contain dangerous levels of lead. The lawsuit relies primarily on independent laboratory testing cited in the complaint, which allegedly detected trace amounts of metal in certain tampon products. Plaintiffs use those findings to argue that the information was not clearly disclosed to consumers. Important limitations:• The testing results are allegations within a lawsuit, not conclusions reached by a court or regulator.
• There has been no ruling that any detected levels exceed FDA limits or established safety thresholds.
• The case focuses on consumer disclosure, labeling, and marketing — not proven acute toxicity.
• No government agency has issued a recall or safety warning specific to these products based on confirmed dangerous exposure.
For balance, the FDA's December 2024 update remains important. The FDA says its review found limitations in the existing literature, did not identify safety concerns associated with tampon use and contaminant exposure, and that it continues to recommend FDA-cleared tampons as a safe menstrual product option. The FDA also noted that the 2024 outside study found metals in tampons but did not test whether metals are released during use, absorbed through the vaginal lining, or enter the bloodstream.
What Laws Are Being Alleged?
This is brought as a consumer protection case. The exact legal claims depend on the complaint and jurisdiction, but these cases commonly allege state consumer protection and false advertising theories based on labeling and marketing.Will There Be a Settlement?
A settlement is possible, especially now that a California class has been certified, but there is no settlement agreement, settlement fund, claim form, or court-approved payout at this time. Consumer labeling cases like this often settle once plaintiffs survive early dismissal and discovery becomes expensive — but this one also carries real defense arguments, in part because the FDA has not found a confirmed safety problem. We would not describe a settlement as "expected."What's Next for the Tampax Lawsuit?
With the California class certified, P&G can ask the Ninth Circuit for permission to appeal the ruling within 14 days. The court's scheduling order sets a mandatory settlement conference on December 10, 2026 and a final pretrial conference on January 29, 2027. Those dates can change, and a settlement conference does not mean a settlement will be reached.California class members are likely to receive a court-approved notice at some point explaining their rights, including the option to exclude themselves. No notice plan had been announced as of September 29, 2026.
There is currently no settlement fund, no claim form, and no deadline to file a claim. A settlement is possible, but not guaranteed. If P&G wins at trial or the case is resolved without a consumer settlement, there may never be a claim form.
When Will the Claim Form Be Available?
There is no claim form right now because the Tampax lawsuit has not settled. If a settlement is reached and preliminarily approved by the court, a settlement website and claim form may become available. Based on the current posture of the litigation, any claim form would likely be months away at minimum, and possibly not until 2027 or later. There is also no guarantee that a claim form will ever become available.Estimated Timeline
There is no payout timeline yet. As a cautious guide:• Mandatory settlement conference: December 10, 2026 (not a guaranteed settlement)
• Earliest realistic settlement window: late 2026 to 2027
• More realistic claim-form window if it settles: sometime in 2027 or later
• If P&G appeals class certification or the case goes to trial: 2027 to 2028 or longer
• If heavily contested or appealed: could stretch beyond 2028
If the case settles, a claim form would likely come only after the parties reach a settlement and the court grants preliminary approval. That process could take many months or longer.
Who Might Qualify If There Is a Settlement?
This is not a settlement yet, so nobody can file a claim right now. The certified class covers California citizens who bought Tampax Pearl or Tampax Radiant in California from July 29, 2020 through class notice. If a settlement is reached later, eligibility would be set by the settlement agreement and could differ.Official Complaint PDF
Sources
• Official complaint PDF: Procter & Gamble Tampax Tampons Class Action Complaint (embedded above)• Docket — Barton v. The Procter & Gamble Company, No. 3:24-cv-01332: CourtListener
• Order granting class certification (ECF No. 131, Sept. 29, 2026): PDF
• Order on motions to seal (ECF No. 120, Aug. 26, 2026): on the CourtListener docket above
• Otkina v. The Procter & Gamble Company, No. 1:26-cv-00773 (N.D. Ill.): CourtListener
• Order denying transfer (Dec. 11, 2025): Justia
• Order on motion to dismiss (Feb. 13, 2025): Justia
• Related court document (S.D. Cal. PDF): GovInfo PDF
• FDA — tampon biocompatibility & toxicology research: U.S. Food and Drug Administration
• WHO lead factsheet: World Health Organization
For more class actions keep scrolling below.
Status
Class Certified — no settlement
Case Title
Barton v. The Procter & Gamble Company
Case Number
3:24-cv-01332
Court
U.S. District Court, Southern District of California
Recent Update
California class certified — Sept. 29, 2026
Products
Tampax Pearl and Tampax Radiant
Claim Form
Not available
Official Docket
CourtListener Docket
