Burt's Bees Lawsuit Update 2026: PFAS 'Natural' Cosmetics Cases Ended With No Settlement

Burt's Bees Lawsuit Update: What Happened to the PFAS "Natural" Cosmetics Cases

If you searched for a Burt's Bees lawsuit settlement or a claim form, here is the short answer: the class actions over PFAS in Burt's Bees cosmetics ended without a settlement, without any court finding that the products contained PFAS, and without a claims process. No settlement fund exists, and there is no compensation available to consumers from these cases.

Below is the full status of every Burt's Bees case we tracked, last reviewed in September 2026.

The PFAS "Natural" Cosmetics Cases (2022–2026)

Gruen v. The Clorox Company — the lead case

On February 15, 2022, plaintiff Daniela Gruen sued The Clorox Company and its subsidiary The Burt's Bees Products Company in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Case No. 3:22-cv-00935). The complaint alleged that Burt's Bees marketed cosmetics as "over 95% natural origin" and free of "chemicals of concern" while failing to disclose the presence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) — so-called "forever chemicals."

Three similar lawsuits followed in the same district — Spindel v. Burt's Bees, Inc., Baez v. The Clorox Company, and Barrett v. The Clorox Company — and the first three were consolidated under the Gruen case number. The consolidated complaint brought 14 counts, including consumer protection claims under the laws of California, Georgia, Michigan, New Jersey, and New York, plus common-law claims for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of warranty, and unjust enrichment.

The testing the cases relied on

The lawsuits leaned on independent lab testing commissioned by the consumer advocacy site Mamavation with Environmental Health News. An EPA-certified laboratory measured organic fluorine, a marker for PFAS. The highest results:

Other named products, including the All Aglow Lip and Cheek Stick and Goodness Glows Liquid Makeup, returned non-detect results, and the consolidated complaint later added Lip Shine, Matte Stick, and Satin Lipstick. It is important to note the limits of this method: organic fluorine testing can be skewed by uneven PFAS distribution within a single tube (by up to ~100 ppm between samples) and by non-PFAS fluorinated compounds, so a positive reading is not proof of intentional PFAS addition.

How the cases ended: dismissed, no settlement

None of the PFAS actions against Burt's Bees ever produced a settlement or a ruling on whether the products actually contained PFAS or whether the marketing was misleading. The consolidated case was voluntarily dismissed. The class claims were dismissed without prejudice — meaning different plaintiffs could theoretically bring similar allegations later — but the named plaintiffs cannot refile their own individual claims.

As of September 2026:

• ❌ No settlement fund exists
• ❌ No claims process or claim form exists
• ❌ No court has ruled on the merits of the PFAS allegations
• ✅ Every related PFAS action against the brand is inactive

The Separate "100% Natural" Lip Products Case

A different lawsuit, Bruno v. Burt's Bees, Inc., targeted the brand on a labeling theory rather than PFAS. Filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court on March 2, 2022 and later removed to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, it alleged that roughly 50 Burt's Bees lip products labeled "100% natural" contained hydrogenated oils — hydrogenated castor oil, apricot kernel oil, and vegetable oil. Plaintiff Perry Bruno argued the hydrogenation process makes those ingredients synthetic.

• August 2022: Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett denied Burt's Bees' motion to dismiss, allowing the case to proceed
• December 7, 2022: the parties filed a stipulation to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), and the case was terminated
• No public settlement was ever disclosed, and the terms of the stipulated dismissal were not made public

Where PFAS Regulation Stands Now

• There is still no federal law prohibiting the intentional addition of PFAS to cosmetics. On December 29, 2025, the FDA released a report required by the 2022 Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act (MoCRA), concluding that toxicological data for most PFAS commonly used in cosmetics is "incomplete or unavailable" and that it could not definitively establish the safety of most compounds it evaluated.
• Ten states have enacted their own bans on intentionally added PFAS in cosmetics.
• Industry representatives have said that when PFAS appear in cosmetics, they may enter through supply-chain contamination of raw materials, equipment coatings, or trace amounts in pigments rather than deliberate addition.

What This Means If You Bought the Named Products

The practical takeaway is straightforward: the litigation ended without any compensation route. If a website or caller offers you "Burt's Bees settlement money" or asks you to fill out a claim form for these cases, treat it as a red flag — there is no administrator, no fund, and no deadline. See our guide on how to spot class action scams.

PFAS litigation remains very active elsewhere, however — including water contamination cases and other consumer labeling suits. If a new Burt's Bees case or settlement is filed in the future, we will update this page and our filings tracker. Burt's Bees is not alone: see our roundup of high-profile lawsuits that ended without a settlement, including Taylor Swift's "Shake It Off" case, the Subway tuna case, and the GameStop/Robinhood litigation.

FAQ

Q: Is there a Burt's Bees settlement in 2026?

A: No. The 2022 PFAS class actions were voluntarily dismissed, and the separate "100% natural" lip products case was dismissed by stipulation in December 2022. No settlement fund or claims process exists.

Q: Can I still file a claim against Burt's Bees?

A: Not through these cases — there is no open settlement to claim against. A brand-new lawsuit by different plaintiffs is theoretically possible (the class claims were dismissed without prejudice), but nothing is currently pending.

Q: Did a court decide whether Burt's Bees products contain PFAS?

A: No. The cases ended before any court ruled on whether the products contained PFAS or whether the "natural" marketing was misleading. The lab results cited in the complaints came from independent testing commissioned by Mamavation — they are allegations, not judicial findings.

This page is updated as new information develops. Last reviewed: September 8, 2026.