Bantu Hair Relaxer Lawsuit – Status & Eligibility

Bantu No Base Relaxer is one of the hair relaxers plaintiffs may select in the federal hair relaxer litigation in the Northern District of Illinois. It is listed under L’Oreal USA and SoftSheen-Carson on the court’s product checklist. Plaintiffs allege that phthalates and other endocrine-disrupting chemicals in relaxers caused or raised the risk of uterine, ovarian or breast cancer, endometriosis and uterine fibroids. These are allegations, not findings. This is MDL No. 3060, with 12,129 actions pending. As of October 2, 2026, no settlement or verdict exists in the MDL.

Latest Bantu Hair Relaxer Lawsuit Updates

October 1, 2026: Status Hearing Reports Issues Resolved

A minute entry for the status hearing in MDL No. 3060 says the parties reported that three issues were completely resolved [1]. They covered duplicate filings, delinquent short forms and CMO 10-A compliance. Judge Mary M. Rowland heard the report in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. By agreement of the parties, defendants withdrew without prejudice their motion to strike Dr. Schwingl’s expert report.

September 24, 2026: Court Sets First Bellwether Trial Date

In a minute entry, Judge Rowland set 2027 case management conferences ahead of the first bellwether trial on September 7, 2027. The court has not said which case goes first.

September 1, 2026: JPML Report Counts 12,129 Pending Actions

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation pending-dockets report dated September 1, 2026 listed 12,129 actions pending in MDL No. 3060 [2]. The same report showed 16,561 total actions in the MDL.

August 27, 2026: Court Adopts Bellwether and Expert Schedule

After an August 20, 2026 status hearing, the court’s minute entry adopted agreed dates. Defendants’ case-specific expert reports were due September 25, 2026. Plaintiffs’ rebuttal reports are due October 13, 2026. The parties are to propose cutting the bellwether cases from ten to five by October 21, 2026. Case-specific expert discovery closes December 21, 2026.

May 5, 2026: Cross Motions Target General-Causation Experts

In the MDL, defendants filed a combined Rule 702 motion to exclude plaintiffs’ general-causation experts. Plaintiffs moved to exclude specific opinions of certain defense general-causation experts. As of October 2, 2026, the court had not decided either motion.

April 2, 2026: Court Picks Ten Bellwether Cases

In the MDL, Judge Rowland selected 10 cases as the bellwether trial pool. On April 22, 2026, the court amended the pool when Sara Robinson’s case replaced Rosa Robinson’s.

January 8, 2026: Science Day Held in the MDL

In the MDL, Judge Rowland held a Science Day. The plaintiffs’ steering committee and the defendants presented experts on the scientific and medical issues in the litigation.

November 13, 2023: Court Trims Claims in Motion to Dismiss Ruling

In its Memorandum Opinion and Order, the court granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ joint motion to dismiss [3]. Under the ruling, the negligence, strict-liability design-defect, failure-to-warn and warranty claims went forward against the defendants. The negligent-misrepresentation, fraud and fraudulent-concealment counts were dismissed.

August 3, 2023: CMO No. 7 Adopts Short Form Complaint Listing Bantu

Case Management Order No. 7 adopted the Short Form Complaint. Its product checklist lists Bantu No Base Relaxer under L’Oreal USA, Inc., L’Oreal USA Products, Inc. and SoftSheen-Carson LLC [4]. The checklist shows products a plaintiff may select. Being on it does not mean the court found a problem with any product.

February 6, 2023: JPML Creates MDL No. 3060

The Panel’s transfer order centralized the hair relaxer actions as MDL No. 3060 in the Northern District of Illinois before Judge Mary M. Rowland [5]. In the order, the Panel found that the actions share allegations that defendants’ hair relaxer products contain phthalates or other endocrine-disrupting chemicals.

October 21, 2022: Mitchell Files Chicago Lawsuit Against L’Oreal USA

Jenny Mitchell filed a federal lawsuit in Chicago against L’Oreal USA, NBC Chicago reported. She alleged that chemical hair relaxers and straighteners caused her uterine cancer [6]. The case is Mitchell v. L’Oreal USA, Inc., et al., No. 1:22-cv-05815, in the same federal court. The complaint does not name Bantu.

October 17, 2022: NIH Announces Sister Study Results on Uterine Cancer

The National Institutes of Health announced a Sister Study analysis. It found higher uterine cancer rates among women who frequently used chemical hair straightening products [7]. The hazard ratio was 2.55 for frequent use compared with never use.

Who May Be Affected?

The court’s Short Form Complaint lets a plaintiff select a listed relaxer, such as Bantu No Base Relaxer. It also has injury boxes for uterine, endometrial and ovarian cancer and for other injuries. The NIH Sister Study followed women ages 35-74. Frequent use meant more than four uses in the past 12 months. About 60 percent of the women who used straighteners in the prior year were Black. NBC Chicago reported that the Chicago plaintiff said she used chemical relaxers and straighteners for more than two decades before her diagnosis of uterine cancer. Whether a claim fits your situation depends on your own facts, which an individual legal review can weigh. The wider hair relaxer litigation, with other listed brands, is on our hair relaxer lawsuit page.

Reported Injuries or Damages

Alleged injuries in the MDL include cancers of the uterus, ovary and breast, endometriosis, fibroids and other harm to the reproductive system. Chang and colleagues studied 33,947 women in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Ever straightener use carried a uterine cancer hazard ratio of 1.80. The authors call it an association and say more research is warranted [8]. The same NIH study estimated that 1.64% of women who never used straighteners would develop uterine cancer by age 70. For frequent users, the estimate was 4.05%. The researchers collected no brand or ingredient data. In a 2021 ovarian cancer analysis of 40,559 women, White and colleagues found a hazard ratio of 2.19 for frequent straightener or relaxer use, while ever use was not associated [9]. The Black Women’s Health Study found an incidence rate ratio of 1.17 for uterine fibroids with ever use of relaxers [10]. An ultrasound study of 1,693 Black women ages 23-35 did not find ever use appreciably associated with fibroids [11]. The MDL court has not found that any product caused an injury.

Recall and Regulatory Background

Most hair dyes do not need FDA approval before sale. The agency’s page on hair dye and hair relaxers says “FDA does monitor the safety of hair dyes and relaxers.” It also asks users to report problems [12]. The FDA’s rule on formaldehyde in hair smoothing or straightening products (RIN 0910-AI83) is at the proposed rule stage. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs got the rule on August 6, 2026 for review [13]. It would prohibit formaldehyde and formaldehyde-releasing chemicals in hair smoothing or straightening products applied with heat. It does not cover lye or no-lye relaxers.

Evidence to Preserve

Keep these records if you used a hair relaxer and were later diagnosed with a reproductive cancer or condition:

• The product container or box that shows the product name and its size, plus photographs of the product and its packaging
• Purchase receipts, plus any store or salon records that show where and when you bought it
• Dates and how often you used the relaxer, written down as closely as you can recall
• Medical records, pathology reports and the diagnosis with its date, including the doctor’s name
• Treatment records from every doctor, clinic or hospital that cared for you after the diagnosis
• Letters, emails or notes you shared with the company, a salon or a doctor about the product

Filing Deadlines

Deadlines to file an injury claim come from state law. They depend on where you live, on when the exposure, illness or injury happened and on when it was diagnosed. Some states start the clock at diagnosis. A claim with strong facts can still end if the filing deadline in your state passes. The MDL’s December 30 and 31, 2026 dates for refiling dismissed cases apply only to cases already filed, not as state filing deadlines. Check with a lawyer promptly about the deadline that applies to you.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is There a Bantu Hair Relaxer Lawsuit?

Bantu No Base Relaxer is listed in the hair relaxer MDL, where the master complaint pleads fifteen counts, including negligence and failure to warn. It seeks compensatory and punitive damages.

Is There a Hair Relaxer Settlement?

As of October 2, 2026, there is no hair relaxer settlement or verdict, and the court has not ruled on class certification. Putative class actions are part of the MDL. Plaintiffs moved to certify medical-monitoring classes.

What Do Plaintiffs Allege About Hair Relaxer Chemicals?

Plaintiffs allege that some defendants’ hair relaxers contain endocrine-disrupting chemicals, including phthalates, listed as “fragrance.” They allege the chemicals enter the body through the hair and scalp. They also allege that defendants targeted Black and Brown women.

What Does the Research Say About Relaxer Use and Uterine Cancer?

The research on relaxer use and uterine cancer shows associations, not proof of causation. In the Chang study, hair dyes and permanents were not associated with uterine cancer. The study followed women for an average of 10.9 years and found 378 uterine cancer cases.

Do Hair Relaxers Cause Fibroids?

Studies of whether hair relaxers cause fibroids point in different directions. The Black Women’s Health Study followed 23,580 premenopausal women in 1997-2009 and found 7,146 fibroid cases. The ultrasound study reported a hazard ratio of 1.51 for recent use, with an interval that includes 1.0.

References

1. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66801859/in-re-hair-relaxer-marketing-sales-practices-and-products-liability/?order_by=desc
2. https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/Pending_MDL_Dockets_By_Actions_Pending-September-1-2026.pdf
3. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ilnd-1_23-cv-00818/pdf/USCOURTS-ilnd-1_23-cv-00818-0.pdf
4. https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/_assets/_documents/_forms/_cmecf/MDL3060/CMO%20No.%207.pdf
5. https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-3060-Transfer_Order-1-23.pdf
6. https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/woman-claims-hair-straightener-caused-uterine-cancer-files-lawsuit-in-chicago/2976104/
7. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/hair-straightening-chemicals-associated-higher-uterine-cancer-risk
8. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9949582/
9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8561257/
10. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3282879/
11. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12849720/
12. https://www.fda.gov/consumers/free-publications-women/hair-dye-and-hair-relaxers
13. https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoDetails?rrid=1496363