“However, unbeknownst to consumers, the Products are unfit for their intended purpose because they contain PFAS, ‘forever chemicals,’ which are dangerous to human health. This not disclosed anywhere on the Product packaging.”

💡 Church & Dwight sold condoms it knew or should have known were contaminated with toxic chemicals without warning consumers

“PFAS have been shown to have a number of toxicological effects in laboratory studies and have been associated with thyroid disorders, immunotoxic effects, and various cancers.”

💡 Scientific research has established clear links between PFAS exposure and serious diseases

“The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention outlined a host of health effects associated with PFAS exposure, including liver damage, decreased fertility, and increased risk of asthma.”

💡 Federal health authorities have documented multiple serious health consequences from PFAS

“PFAS can enter the body during sexual intercourse through skin absorption. The female and male genitals have delicate tissues that are more prone to absorbing chemicals than other areas of the body. When condoms are placed on genitalia, PFAS can be absorbed readily.”

💡 The intimate nature of condom use creates particularly dangerous exposure pathways for toxic chemicals

“When body temperature increases during sexual intercourse, the heat can increase the transfer of PFAS through the skin barrier.”

💡 Normal sexual activity actually worsens the toxic exposure from contaminated condoms

“According to the EPA, the levels at which negative human health effects could occur are significantly lower than previously understood, including at near zero in some instances.”

💡 Even tiny amounts of PFAS are dangerous, meaning any contamination is unacceptable

“There is no effective treatment for removal of PFAS chemicals from the body. Therefore, experts agree that the most effective strategy to decrease health risk is to avoid and/or limit exposure to products known to contain PFAS chemicals.”

💡 Once PFAS enters your body from contaminated condoms, you cannot get rid of it

“Defendant had exclusive knowledge of the contents and ingredients of its Trojan condoms, including whether the products contained PFAS chemicals.”

💡 Church & Dwight knew what was in their products but chose not to tell consumers

“Consumers lack the expertise to ascertain the true ingredients in the condoms prior to purchase. Absent testing by a qualified lab, consumers such as Plaintiff and the Class Members were unable to determine that Defendant’s Products contained PFAS chemicals given Defendant’s failure to disclose the presence of PFAS.”

💡 The company exploited consumers’ inability to independently verify product safety

“Plaintiff and Class Members bargained for condoms that were free of harmful toxins, and were deprived of the basis of their bargain when Defendant sold them a Product containing PFAS.”

💡 Consumers paid for safe products but received contaminated ones instead

“As the result of Defendant’s brand recognition and reputation, Defendant is able to charge, and does charge, a premium above the price for condoms charged by competitors and generic manufacturers.”

💡 The company profited from its reputation while selling defective products

“Defendant made the untrue and/or misleading representations and omissions willfully, wantonly, and with reckless disregard for the truth. Defendant manufactures and sells the Products and therefore possessed the knowledge of what the Products contained.”

💡 This was not an innocent mistake but deliberate concealment of known dangers

“No reasonable consumer would expect that a product marketed for use on genitalia contain dangerous PFAS, which are indisputably linked to harmful health effects in humans.”

💡 The company violated the most basic consumer expectations of product safety

“Defendant was unjustly enriched in retaining the revenues derived from Plaintiff and the Nationwide Class Members’ purchases of the Products. Retention of those monies under these circumstances is unjust and inequitable because Defendant misrepresented and failed to disclose that the Products were unfit for their intended purpose as it was not safe for use.”

💡 The company profited by deceiving consumers about product safety

“Defendant’s Products are not fit for the ordinary purpose for which they were sold because they contain or have a material risk of containing dangerous PFAS.”

💡 The condoms fail to meet the basic standard of being safe for their intended use