Every federal MDL from the Judicial Panel's own reports · updated September 1, 2026Find your lawsuit →
Settlement Record

HomeLawsuitsAFFF firefighting foam lawsuit

AFFF firefighting foam lawsuit

Active MDLStatus as of September 3, 2026 · MDL No. 2873

Active MDL for personal-injury and wrongful-death claims (15,264 pending actions as of the JPML's September 1, 2026 report); the public water-provider contamination claims have already settled and are being paid out, but no global settlement covers individual injury claims. Federal litigation over PFAS-containing firefighting foam (AFFF); public water-provider claims against 3M and DuPont/Chemours/Corteva concluded with paid settlements, while individual personal-injury claims from firefighters, military personnel, and exposed residents remain active with no global settlement yet.

The docket record

Actions pending
15,264+18(+0.1%)
Total actions, historical
19,840
Change, 3 months
+24(+0.2%)
Change, 12 months
+2,349(+18.2%)
Docket
MDL No. 2873
Court
District of South Carolina
Transferee judge
Richard M. GergelU.S. District Judge

Source: JPML “Pending MDL Dockets by Actions Pending,” report dated September 1, 2026 · first in our series Jan 2024

Actions pending in MDL 2873, by monthly JPML report04.0k8.1k12k16kJan 2024Jul 2024Feb 2025Aug 2025Feb 2026Aug 2026Sep 2026
Actions pending on each monthly JPML report, Jan 2024 to Sep 2026. Gaps are months the report omitted the figure.

Month-by-month figures, Jan 2024 to Sep 2026

Report dateActions pendingChangeTotal, historicalReport
September 1, 202615,264+1819,840PDF
August 3, 202615,246+219,822PDF
July 1, 202615,244+419,819PDF
June 1, 202615,240+819,815PDF
May 1, 202615,232+1019,807PDF
April 1, 202615,222+219,797PDF
March 2, 202615,220+419,795PDF
February 2, 202615,216+319,791PDF
January 5, 202615,213−12119,788PDF
December 2, 202515,334+8519,722PDF
November 3, 202515,249+1,30719,637PDF
October 1, 202513,942+1,02718,086PDF
September 2, 202512,915+85117,052PDF
August 1, 202512,064+96816,176PDF
July 1, 202511,096+70515,114PDF
June 2, 202510,391+1,04914,335PDF
May 1, 20259,342+41413,280PDF
April 1, 20258,928+49812,778PDF
March 3, 20258,430+33812,263PDF
February 3, 20258,092+45911,904PDF
January 2, 20257,633+26311,432PDF
December 2, 20247,370−2,52611,163PDF
October 1, 20249,896+32010,185PDF
September 3, 20249,576+519,843PDF
August 1, 20249,525+3279,791PDF
July 1, 20249,198+9289,453PDF
June 3, 20248,270+2098,494PDF
May 1, 20248,061+3238,262PDF
April 1, 20247,738+5687,939PDF
March 1, 20247,170+1767,367PDF
February 1, 20246,994+2797,191PDF
January 2, 20246,7156,912PDF

Full docket title: IN RE: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. Programmatic record page: MDL 2873.

Where it stands

MDL 2873 is centralized before Judge Richard M. Gergel in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. The public water-system track concluded: 3M's settlement (up to $12.5 billion, about $10.3 billion in present value) received final court approval on March 29, 2024, and a separate $1.185 billion settlement with Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva was reached in June 2023 and preliminarily approved that August. Those funds compensate public water utilities for PFAS testing and treatment, not individuals. The personal-injury track, covering firefighters, military personnel, and residents who allege AFFF exposure caused cancer or other disease, has not settled. The court selected a bellwether pool of 28 cases across four injury categories (kidney cancer, testicular cancer, thyroid disease, ulcerative colitis). A first bellwether trial on kidney cancer was set for October 20, 2025, then vacated, and no new trial date had been set as of the most recent public reporting. Rule 702 hearings on general-causation experts for additional disease categories were ongoing into 2026.

Sources: SCD - MDL 2873 case page · Pending MDL Dockets By Actions Pending, Report Date 9/1/2026 · 3M Settlement with Public Water Suppliers to Address PFAS… · Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva Reach Comprehensive PFAS Se…; full list at the end of this page.

What the lawsuits are about

AFFF (aqueous film-forming foam) is a firefighting foam that contains PFAS chemicals, mainly PFOS and PFOA, and has been used since the 1960s and 1970s by the U.S. military, commercial airports, and municipal and industrial fire departments to smother liquid-fuel fires. Plaintiffs allege that manufacturers knew or should have known that PFAS in the foam were toxic and would persist in the environment, and that AFFF use contaminated groundwater and drinking water near military bases, airports, and firefighter training sites, and separately caused personal injury through occupational exposure.

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized AFFF-related federal cases before Judge Richard M. Gergel in the District of South Carolina on December 7, 2018 (357 F. Supp. 3d 1391 (J.P.M.L. 2018)), consolidating civil actions filed by public water systems, individuals, and state and local governments. The litigation split into tracks: property/water-contamination claims by water utilities and governments, and personal-injury claims by people who allege disease from AFFF exposure.

As of September 2026, the water-provider track has substantially resolved through the 3M and Chemours/DuPont/Corteva settlements described above. The personal-injury track remains active. The court built a bellwether discovery pool of 28 cases (8 kidney cancer, 8 testicular cancer, 8 thyroid disease, 4 ulcerative colitis) to test causation and damages theories ahead of any global resolution. The first scheduled bellwether trial, on kidney cancer, was vacated from its October 2025 date, and litigation over the science (Rule 702 challenges to general-causation experts) was ongoing for other disease categories into 2026. There has been no global settlement announced for personal-injury claims.

Injuries named in the filings

  • Kidney cancer
  • Testicular cancer
  • Thyroid disease (including thyroid cancer)
  • Ulcerative colitis

Principal defendants: 3M Company; E.I. du Pont de Nemours (DuPont); The Chemours Company; Corteva; Tyco Fire Products LP; National Foam Inc.; Kidde-Fenwal Inc.; BASF Corporation; Buckeye Fire Equipment Co..

Sources: SCD - MDL 2873 case page · Pending MDL Dockets By Actions Pending, Report Date 9/1/2026 · 3M Settlement with Public Water Suppliers to Address PFAS… · Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva Reach Comprehensive PFAS Se…; full list at the end of this page.

Who the filings say qualifies

Illustration of a person seen from behind holding a phone showing a starburst ad, with a ruled checklist document on the table in front of them
Compare the ad to the filings' own criteria before you fill in anyone's form.

The personal-injury track of MDL 2873 is organized around the exposure and diagnosis categories the court used to build its bellwether discovery pool, and around the plaintiff fact sheets each individual claimant must file. This is not a certified class and there is no settlement fund to apply to; it describes who has an active, unresolved claim in the litigation.

  • Alleged AFFF exposure, either occupational (firefighter, military servicemember, or airport/industrial fire responder who handled or was exposed to AFFF) or through drinking water contaminated by AFFF runoff near a military base, airport, or firefighter training facility
  • A diagnosis of one of the injury categories the court has been litigating in the personal-injury bellwether pool: kidney cancer, testicular cancer, thyroid disease, or ulcerative colitis
  • A completed plaintiff fact sheet documenting exposure history, diagnosis, and supporting medical records, as required by the MDL's case management orders
  • A filed and properly served complaint in the MDL; cases filed after applicable case-management deadlines face added requirements, including medical-record production within 90 days and causation-expert disclosures within 120 days of filing

Source: AFFF/PFAS Firefighting Foam: Personal-Injury Claims Continue as Water Cases Resolve Separately.

These are the criteria in the public record, not a promise about any individual case. A law firm evaluates each case on its own facts, and limitations periods vary by state.

Want a case review for the AFFF firefighting foam?

Case reviews for this litigation are not open through this site yet. Leave your details and we will pass them to a participating firm or intake partner only if one accepts this litigation, and only with the consent below.

Key dates

  1. JPML centralizes AFFF-related federal actions before Judge Richard M. Gergel in the District of South Carolina, creating MDL 2873. source
  2. Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva sign a definitive agreement to pay $1.185 billion to resolve PFAS claims from a defined class of U.S. public water systems. source
  3. 3M's public water-supplier PFAS settlement (up to $12.5 billion, about $10.3 billion present value, paid through 2036) receives final court approval. source
  4. First personal-injury bellwether trial, focused on kidney cancer, is scheduled, then later vacated with no new date set at that time. source
  5. Plaintiffs' and defendants' leadership structures extended through June 2026 as Rule 702 general-causation expert proceedings continue on additional injury categories. source
  6. JPML's monthly pending-MDL report lists MDL 2873 at 15,264 actions pending and 19,840 total actions filed, still before Judge Gergel in D.S.C. source

Questions people ask

Is the AFFF firefighting foam lawsuit still active?

Yes, for personal-injury and wrongful-death claims. The public water-provider contamination claims against 3M and against Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva have already settled and are being paid out. The personal-injury claims from firefighters, military personnel, and exposed residents remain in active litigation with no global settlement as of September 2026.

What is AFFF and why is it being litigated?

AFFF is a PFAS-based firefighting foam used by the military, airports, and fire departments since the 1960s and 1970s. Plaintiffs allege the PFAS chemicals in it are toxic, persist in the environment, contaminated drinking water near bases and airports, and caused disease in people directly exposed to the foam.

Did the AFFF water contamination settlements already pay out?

3M's settlement with public water systems (up to $12.5 billion, about $10.3 billion present value) received final court approval on March 29, 2024, and payments run through 2036. A separate $1.185 billion settlement with Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva was signed in June 2023. Both funds go to public water utilities for testing and treatment, not to individuals.

What injuries qualify for an AFFF personal-injury claim?

The court's personal-injury bellwether pool covers four categories: kidney cancer, testicular cancer, thyroid disease, and ulcerative colitis. A claimant generally needs documented AFFF exposure (occupational or through contaminated drinking water) plus one of these diagnoses, filed with a plaintiff fact sheet and supporting medical records.

Is there a trial date for AFFF personal-injury claims?

A first bellwether trial on kidney cancer was scheduled for October 20, 2025, but it was vacated and, as of the most recent public reporting, no new trial date had been set while expert-causation proceedings continued for other injury categories.

Who are the defendants in the AFFF lawsuits?

The largest named defendants are 3M, DuPont, Chemours, and Corteva, along with foam and fire-suppression equipment makers including Tyco Fire Products, National Foam, Kidde-Fenwal, BASF, and Buckeye Fire Equipment, among others named across the consolidated cases.

Sources: SCD - MDL 2873 case page · Pending MDL Dockets By Actions Pending, Report Date 9/1/2026 · 3M Settlement with Public Water Suppliers to Address PFAS… · Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva Reach Comprehensive PFAS Se…; full list at the end of this page.

Track this docket

We re-read the JPML report on the first business day of each month. Get an email when this record changes: case count, status, or a settlement development.

Sources

  1. U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, “Pending MDL Dockets by Actions Pending,” monthly reports January 2, 2024 to September 1, 2026. Transferee court: District of South Carolina, Richard M. Gergel.
  2. SCD - MDL 2873 case page, U.S. District Court, District of South Carolina. Accessed September 3, 2026.
  3. Pending MDL Dockets By Actions Pending, Report Date 9/1/2026, U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Accessed September 3, 2026.
  4. 3M Settlement with Public Water Suppliers to Address PFAS in Drinking Water Receives Final Court Approval, 3M. Accessed September 3, 2026.
  5. Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva Reach Comprehensive PFAS Settlement with U.S. Water Systems, DuPont. Accessed September 3, 2026.
  6. Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva Provide Update and Affirm Support for PFAS Settlement with U.S. Water Systems, Corteva. Accessed September 3, 2026.
  7. First US Trial Over PFAS Injuries to Focus on Kidney Cancer, Bloomberg Law. Accessed September 3, 2026.
  8. AFFF/PFAS Firefighting Foam: Personal-Injury Claims Continue as Water Cases Resolve Separately, The Claim Bridge (as summarized by plaintiff-side sources). Accessed September 3, 2026.
  9. PFAS MDL Update 2026: Where the Litigation Stands, PFAS Exposure Claims (as summarized by plaintiff-side sources). Accessed September 3, 2026.
  10. MDL-2873 Order Denying Transfer (1-25), U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Accessed September 3, 2026.

Settlement Record is not a law firm and does not give legal advice. We may be compensated if you request a case review and are referred to a law firm or intake partner. Settlement Record is not affiliated with any court, agency, defendant or law firm named on this page.

Before you fill out anyone's form

Read the record before you read the ad.

Every lawsuit on this site is a docket the Judicial Panel publishes. Check the count, the status and who the filings cover, then decide who to talk to.

Free · public court data · no account.

Three things to check first

  1. Is the lawsuit real? Every federal MDL is on the Judicial Panel's monthly report. If a docket number is on our register, the litigation exists; if it settled or was dismissed, the record says so.

  2. Who do the filings say qualifies? The master complaint and the court's plaintiff fact sheet define the injuries and exposures at issue. We quote those, not an ad.

  3. Where is the official form? For settled class actions, the court-appointed administrator runs the claims. We link to it and never host a claim form ourselves.

Public court data, dated and sourced. Not a law firm, not legal advice.