A special master has said experts for the tens of thousands of women whose suits in New Jersey federal court allege that Johnson & Johnson talc products caused their ovarian cancer can testify at trial about the causal connection between their disease and use of the products.

U.S. District Judge Freda Wolfson said in a 685-page report Tuesday that the experts for the plaintiffs should be allowed to testify about the link between talcum powder use and ovarian cancer. She said the experts used reliable methods to reach their opinions that there is a "statistically significant" association between using talcum powder in the genital area and ovarian cancer.

Judge Wolfson, now retired, had previously issued a ruling in 2020 that turned down J&J's previous attempt to bar all of the plaintiffs' experts from testifying that J&J's baby powder contains asbestos and that talc can cause ovarian cancer.

A year after her ruling, J&J started a multiyear effort at a so-called Texas two-step bankruptcy for its talc unit. Three attempts to do so were rejected by the courts, including in March when a Texas bankruptcy judge rejected its effort through Chapter 11 to settle thousands of claims and threw out a roughly $9 billion bankruptcy deal over problems with the company's voting procedures and third-party releases.

Since then, J&J said it would return to the courtroom to resolve the talc cases and forgo more bankruptcy efforts.

In the intervening years since Judge Wolfson's initial order, there have also been updates to the federal rules for expert testimony, as well as the publication of epidemiological studies on talc and ovarian cancer.

But those developments didn't alter her findings from 2020, Judge Wolfson said.

Johnson & Johnson developed baby powder using the mineral talc and started selling it in the United States in 1894. The ingredients were reformulated in 2020 in the United States, and in 2023 for international markets, replacing talc as the main ingredient with cornstarch powder.

"Indeed, there have been no seismic shifts in the scientific landscape that would warrant reconsideration of my ruling here," Judge Wolfson said. "In fact, the majority of additional studies support the association between talc and ovarian cancer, without any new studies concluding that no causal link exists."

"I therefore find, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the plaintiffs' experts have applied reliable methodologies to arrive at their opinions that the pre- and post-2020 epidemiologic studies, taken as a whole, demonstrate a positive, statistically significant association between genital talc powder use and ovarian cancer," the judge continued.

The judge reiterated in the report that she is addressing the admissibility of the experts, and that it will be up to a jury to weigh the evidence and reach a conclusion.

Judge Wolfson made her recommendation to U.S. District Judge Michael Shipp, who is presiding over the MDL.

It's by far the largest pending MDL in the country, with 67,000 claims and more filed each day, according to the judge's report.

Andy Birchfield of Beasley Allen, which represents women in the litigation, hailed the ruling as a "major victory" for the plaintiffs.

"Let me be clear: Our clients will prevail. Our trial teams are ready. The science is strong. We'll go toe-to-toe as long as it takes," Birchfield said in a statement. "It's time for J&J to reconsider its horribly flawed strategy."

The judge's report covers about 40 experts. Judge Wolfson did bar experts from testifying on the presence of heavy metals and fragrance in the talc.

J&J's worldwide litigation head Eric Haas said in a statement that the company will appeal the report to Judge Shipp on the grounds that Judge Wolfson overstepped her gatekeeping duty.

Out of the 17 ovarian cases J&J has tried, it has won 16 either at trial or on appeal, Haas said.

"Importantly, this recommendation has no impact on our overall litigation strategy — except to incrementally strengthen our position," Haas said in a statement. "We will continue to aggressively defend against these meritless cases one-by-one because valid science and the law are squarely on our side and will only continue to strengthen in our favor moving forward."

The steering committee is represented by Christopher M. Placitella of Cohen Placitella & Roth PC, Michelle A. Parfitt of Ashcraft & Gerel LLP and Leigh O'Dell of the Beasley Allen Law Firm.

J&J is represented by Jessica Brennan of Barnes & Thornburg LLP and Allison Brown, Jessica Davidson and Kristen Fournier of Kirkland & Ellis LLP.

The federal multidistrict litigation is In re: Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Products Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, case number 3:16-md-02738, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.