Blog

Last updated: October 14, 2025

OGX Lawsuit: 2025 Snapshot

• Primary federal case: Carr v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., et al. (E.D.N.Y. No. 1:21-cv-06557) remains active; on May 14, 2025, the court stayed the class-certification briefing, and a consolidated status conference was scheduled for May 30, 2025. (docketalarm.com)

• Brand ownership: OGX is sold by Vogue International in Kenvue. Johnson & Johnson completed the Kenvue breakup in August 2023 and later looked to divest its remaining interest in 2024. (Kenvue+2JNJ.com+2)

• No blanket recall: There is no FDA alert for a recall of all OGX shampoos. A distinct 2022 Unilever dry-shampoo aerosol recall (not this brand) was owing to the possibility of benzene contamination. (U.S. Food and Drug Administration)

• Regulatory context: FDA’s Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act (MoCRA) broadens regulation (facility registration, listing of products, reporting serious adverse events).

• Ingredient context: DMDM hydantoin (a formaldehyde-releasing preservative) continues in Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) panel review; the last Expert Panel meeting was Sept. 8–9, 2025. (cir-safety.org)

Overview of the OGX Lawsuit

Active OGX lawsuits are ongoing in 2025. Consumers report hair loss and scalp burning, itching or rashes following use of certain OGX shampoos and conditioners. Lawsuits blame the ingredient DMDM hydantoin, a volatile, slowly effective formaldehyde-donor antimicrobial preservative. Defendants argue causation, saying that exposure and concentrations of DMDM hydantoin in the scalp are low, and some products have been reformulated without the ingredient. Following is the latest status of the cases, who may be entitled, and what you will need to report a potential claim.

What is the OGX Lawsuit?

The suits say that OGX products resulted in shedding of the hair, brittleness, itching, or rashes and the labeling and advertising encouraged that OGX products would result in “healthy hair” without adequate warnings of DMDM hydantoin. The problem arises from utilizing the formulation of the DMDM hydantoin. It is known that the ingredient is capable of slowly releasing low (millimolar to micromolar) amounts of formaldehyde, to keep the products from microbial growth, the longer it sits without use.

The classification of the lawsuits can’t be more different amongst the parties. The plaintiffs claim that prolonged exposure on the scalp increases the risk of irritation and sensitization. The defense of these claims is based on various thermodynamic parameters, which claim that all three levels of exposure are insignificant in amount and/or below recognised dosing thresholds after long periods of use.

Who Owns OGX Today?

Johnson & Johnson acquired Vogue International (maker/marketer of OGX) for $3.3B in 2016. In 2023, J&J completed the separation of its consumer-health unit into Kenvue, with OGX now within Kenvue.

Is DMDM Hydantoin Banned?

No categorical ban applies. It’s a preservative used to prevent microbial growth in water-based products. Safety debates focus on contact sensitization and cumulative exposure; many brands have reformulated their products. CIR continues to review the ingredient (at the latest panel meeting in Sept. 2025). (cir-safety.org)

Is There a Recall Covering All OGX Shampoos?

No. FDA notices do not show a blanket recall covering all OGX shampoos. Don’t confuse this with the separate 2022 Unilever aerosol dry-shampoo recall involving potential benzene contamination across several other brands. (U.S. Food and Drug Administration)

Quick Timeline of Key Events

The Core Federal Case: Carr v. Johnson & Johnson

The Carr complaint targets OGX shampoos and conditioners. It alleges a design defect and failure to warn. It also cites negligent misrepresentation and consumer fraud. Plaintiffs argue DMDM hydantoin made products unsafe. They claim long-term exposure harmed users. The complaint details hair loss and irritation.

Filings show active litigation in Brooklyn. Orders addressed class allegations and briefing. The docket notes ongoing coordination across related cases. New entries appeared during 2025. Judges continue managing discovery and motions. The case has not yet reached trial. Settlement remains possible at any stage.

What Companies Say in Response

Johnson & Johnson argues the products are safe. It cites safety reviews and internal assessments. It says DMDM hydantoin is present in minimal amounts and that global bodies allow such preservatives. Company statements mention reformulation efforts. They outline steps to reduce or eliminate DMDM hydantoin. Legal defenses also challenge causation and damages.

Defense teams often argue other causes explain hair loss. They mention stress, diet, and thyroid issues. They also highlight hair treatments and heat damage. Medical histories can complicate causation. Courts must evaluate expert opinions. Judges gatekeep methodology and reliability.

The Ingredient at Issue: DMDM Hydantoin

DMDM hydantoin prevents microbial growth in water-based products. The molecule slowly releases formaldehyde. The release depends on time, temperature, and water. That chemistry preserves shelf life. Critics argue the tradeoff harms users. Formaldehyde can trigger contact dermatitis. Sensitized users may react at low levels.

Public sources link formaldehyde to cancer at high exposures. Cosmetic levels are usually far lower. The dispute turns on sensitization and cumulative exposure. Plaintiffs focus on chronic scalp contact. They also cite shower heat and steam. Those conditions could raise exposure slightly. Defense teams counter that exposures remain tiny. They argue that levels fall under accepted thresholds.

Evidence Presented So Far

Plaintiffs cite patch tests and dermatology literature. They highlight sensitization rates for formaldehyde donors. They also present consumer reports of shedding. Photos and timelines support narratives. Critics caution against self-report bias. Experts debate differential diagnoses thoroughly.

Defense experts emphasize dose and exposure, noting that hazard differs from risk and citing industry safety margins. They also challenge temporality and dose-response. Courts examine both sides under evidentiary rules. Decisions vary across jurisdictions.

Other Lawsuits and Related Allegations

Articles track similar claims against other shampoos. Several brands faced DMDM lawsuits. Consumers also filed cases over benzene in aerosols. Investigations led to separate recalls across categories. These stories raised public awareness widely. Plaintiffs argue systemic labeling failures occurred.

OGX remains a frequent focus due to volume. Retail presence magnified the issue. Social media posts amplified complaints. Law firms-built campaign pages. Coverage extended into mainstream outlets.

Settlements And Payouts

Reports describe confidential resolutions in 2022 involving early federal filings, settlement sums were not public. Settlement sums were not public. Consumer class payouts often run small. That pattern repeats across many product cases. Significant personal injury awards remain rare here. The Carr case continues separately.

Web resources note additional consumer settlements. These apply to adjacent product lines. The overall picture suggests modest refunds. Courts may also order injunctive relief. Label changes and disclosures often appear. Plaintiffs still pursue broader relief in active cases.

Regulatory And Market Responses

Industry groups updated preservative guidance. Brands explored alternative systems. Shoppers demand shorter ingredient lists. Reformulation announcements continued after 2021. Some sources claim DMDM products stayed on shelves. Old inventory complicated that transition. Retailers phased out stock gradually.

Media and advocacy sites followed FDA communications. Cosmetic oversight differs from drug regulation. Companies must ensure product safety. Mandatory adverse event reporting applies in defined cases. Plaintiffs want stronger rules and clear warnings. Debate continues over thresholds and labeling.

Who Qualifies to File an OGX Lawsuit

Documented use: Courts want proof of OGX purchases. Receipts, loyalty records, or photos help. Bank statements can also help.

Symptoms: Hair shedding and breakage matter. Scalp irritation and redness also matter. Dermatology notes strengthen claims. Patch testing may support causation.

Timing: Exposure must predate symptoms. A clear timeline supports causation arguments. Courts look for temporal consistency.

Alternative causes: Medical reviews must address other factors. Counsel will request labs and history. Opposing experts will scrutinize everything.

Deadlines: Each state sets limitation rules. Delays can bar claims completely. Early consultations protect rights.

What Compensation Might Include

Economic losses: Medical visits and dermatology care. Diagnostic testing and treatments. Wigs and cosmetic solutions also count. Receipts help quantify costs.

Non-economic losses: Pain, distress, and embarrassment. Social and work impacts as well. Courts treat these cautiously. Proof must tie to the product.

Class refunds: Many class actions target price premiums. Payouts can be modest per person. Injunctions may change labels. Those outcomes still matter.

Courts may reduce requested sums. Judges often trim fee requests. Outcomes vary across venues. Settlements rarely equal admissions. Documents sometimes remain sealed.

How To Document Your Case

• Create a product log today. List product names and variants. Add store names and dates. Keep packaging if available. Photograph the remaining bottles quickly.
• Request pharmacy and clinic records. Ask dermatologists for detailed notes. Include patch tests if performed. Collect lab reports and diagnoses.
• Draft a symptom timeline. Use simple daily entries. Record shedding episodes and photos. Note stressors and diet shifts. Evidence helps counter alternative theories.
• Save communications with brands. Keep emails and support tickets. Preserve social media posts. Screenshots can later vanish.

Litigation Strategy: What Lawyers Consider

Attorneys assess exposure duration and frequency. They weigh ingredient concentrations. They study batch codes and dates. Plaintiff’s credibility matters greatly. Treating physician support matters as well.

Lawyers analyze jurisdictional trends. Some venues certify classes more readily. Others restrict expert testimony more tightly. Defense resources also shape outcomes. Brand defendants mount vigorous challenges. Early motion practice can trim claims.

Frequently Asked Questions About the OGX Lawsuit

What does the OGX lawsuit allege?

It alleges hair loss and irritation from DMDM hydantoin. It also alleges misleading marketing and inadequate warnings.

Is Carr v. Johnson & Johnson still active?

Yes. The federal docket shows activity through May 2025. The court held a consolidated status conference on May 30, 2025.

Did Johnson & Johnson admit wrongdoing?

Reports describe confidential settlements in 2022. Those did not include admissions. The company continues to defend product safety.

What products sit at issue?

Complaints reference multiple OGX shampoos and conditioners. Labels promising healthy hair appear central. Ingredients lists and batch data matter.

Can I still file a claim now?

Possibly. Limitation periods vary across states. Consult counsel quickly to preserve rights.

Is the OGX class action still active in 2025?

Yes. The Carr docket in E.D.N.Y. shows 2025 activity, including a mid-May stay of class-cert briefing and a consolidated status conference set for May 30, 2025. (docketalarm.com)

Who owns OGX—J&J or Kenvue?

OGX (marketed by Vogue International) is part of Kenvue. J&J finalized the Kenvue separation in August 2023 and later moved to exit its remaining stake. (Kenvue+2JNJ.com+2)

What proof helps most?

Bottles with batch codes, receipts/loyalty records, dermatology notes and patch-test results, and a dated symptom log.

Practical Steps If You Used OGX

• Stop using suspect products today. Save the bottle and receipt. Photograph labels and batch codes.
• Schedule a dermatology appointment. Request documentation for shedding. Ask about patch testing options.
• Gather purchase records from retailers. Request loyalty statements from chains. Bank entries can support dates.
• Avoid aggressive treatments during evaluation. Reduce heat exposure and harsh chemicals. Follow medical guidance instead.
• Contact a lawyer early. Discuss class and individual options. Share your evidence list. Ask about fees and deadlines.

Media, myths, And misinformation

Social media accelerated awareness quickly. Posts showed dramatic shedding photos. Not all posts reflect verified causation. Courts require medical proof. Journal articles discuss sensitization mechanisms. Consumer blogs often overstate certainty. Balanced reading remains essential.

Several sites summarize filings and updates. Some offer attorney marketing content. Others repost press material. Evaluate credibility carefully. Cross-check against primary dockets. Review dates and jurisdictions closely.

How Courts May Resolve Key Questions

Adequacy of warnings: Judges weigh label clarity. Plaintiffs push for stronger hazard disclosures. Defense argues no duty existed under standards.

General causation: Experts debate whether DMDM donors cause shedding. Dose, duration, and susceptibility matter. Courts scrutinize methods and literature.

Specific causation: Doctors must link exposure to that person’s loss. Alternative causes often complicate proof. Timelines and testing become crucial.

Class certification: Courts question commonality and predominance. Labels and batches varied over time. Individual causation can defeat class cohesion. Some claims still suit class treatment, like refunds.

Damages: Price premium models support class refunds. Personal injury awards need robust proof. Settlements may combine both elements.

Ownership Quick Reference

• 2016 — Johnson & Johnson completes $3.3B acquisition of Vogue International (OGX). JNJ.com
• 2023 — Kenvue becomes a fully independent company after J&J’s exchange offer. (Kenvue+1)

Conclusion

The OGX lawsuit continues through 2025. Plaintiffs press claims over DMDM hydantoin. Defense teams maintain product safety. Reformulation announcements did not end disputes. Courts still weigh warnings, causation, and damages. One central case remains active in New York. Several consumer actions resolved earlier. Your best move involves documentation and timely advice. Gather records and seek medical evaluation. Consider legal counsel to protect rights. The OGX lawsuit will keep evolving as dockets move forward.

Important Note
This page is informational and not legal or medical advice. For legal questions, consult a licensed attorney; for health questions, consult a clinician.