Judge Rejects Plan by Roundup Maker Bayer to Resolve Future Claims

The company’s attempt to resolve the future cases came in the form of a novel class-action settlement, which sought to bind people who have used Roundup but aren’t yet sick, as well as Roundup users with cancer who haven’t already sued.

In a six-page order, U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria in San Francisco pointed to what he called “glaring flaws” in the proposal, including that it offered few benefits for those who haven’t yet gotten sick while forcing them to give up substantial legal rights down the line.

Bayer representatives didn’t respond to requests for comment Wednesday.

Elizabeth Cabraser, a plaintiffs’ lawyer who helped create the proposal, said she was disappointed by the ruling and still believes such a settlement would “provide tremendous financial, health and safety benefits for class members.”

Investors have been keenly awaiting Judge Chhabria’s decision, hoping an approval of the proposal would help break a yearslong downward spiral of the company’s share price, analysts say.

The challenge for Bayer, which stands by the safety of Roundup and its main ingredient, glyphosate, is how to contain liability on a product that it continues to sell without any warning label. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has said the product is safe and wouldn’t permit a cancer warning.

At a daylong hearing earlier this month, attorneys pushing the proposal argued that it was intended to benefit migrant farmers and agricultural workers who use Roundup often but haven’t been a huge part of the plaintiff pool in the existing Roundup cases. During the hearing, Judge Chhabria called that reasoning a “straw man” that didn’t make up for its failings.

Bayer and plaintiffs’ lawyers had proposed creating a medical monitoring program to help Roundup users detect cancer early. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma, however, is difficult to detect before symptoms appear, which Judge Chhabria said made the benefits of such a program “far less meaningful than the attorneys suggest.” He also blasted a compensation fund that was only guaranteed to run for around four years, finding that the long latency period of NHL means most people who aren’t yet sick would be unlikely to benefit from it.

Judge Chhabria suggested at the hearing that the company craft a label that doesn’t concede the product causes cancer but explains the contrasting scientific findings of U.S. and international agencies, some of which have suggested a cancer link. Bayer has contended that the EPA would block any such a label.

The judge had said at the hearing he wouldn’t issue a ruling quickly, but noted in his written order that he changed his mind after concluding that “mere tweaks cannot salvage the agreement.” The proposal was Bayer’s second attempt at resolving future claims, and Judge Chhabria said he would entertain a new proposal.

Bayer shareholders have been frustrated with the loss in market value and slow progress in resolving the protracted legal battle. The company inherited the Roundup cases with its 2018 acquisition of Monsanto for $63 billion, and the company’s share price is down more than 40% from pre-acquisition levels.

Negotiations with plaintiffs’ lawyers on settling pending lawsuits have also dragged on for months.

At its first-quarter results on May 7, Bayer said it had resolved roughly 96,000 claims out of a total of 125,000. Earlier this month, Bayer also lost an appeal in one of the three cases to go to trial.

Write to Sara Randazzo at [email protected] and Ruth Bender at [email protected]