Shampoo Hair Loss Lawsuits: OGX, TRESemme, Suave, and Native

Most of these cases share one ingredient: DMDM hydantoin, a preservative that works by slowly releasing formaldehyde. The plaintiffs said some users are allergic to it and develop scalp dermatitis, breakage, and alopecia, and that the companies marketed smoothing and strengthening benefits without warning about that risk. The companies said the ingredient is legal, widely used, and listed on the label.

OGX (Johnson & Johnson and Vogue International)

Carr v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., No. 1:21-cv-06557, was filed November 23, 2021 in the Eastern District of New York. The complaint alleged that OGX shampoos and conditioners containing DMDM hydantoin caused hair loss and other injuries to "hundreds or thousands" of consumers. Several other OGX suits filed in 2021 in California, Illinois, and New Jersey were closed in 2021 and 2022.

TRESemme Keratin Smooth (Unilever)

Suits over TRESemme Keratin Smooth shampoos and conditioners were consolidated in the Northern District of Illinois as Castillo v. Unilever United States, Inc., No. 1:20-cv-06786, with ten named plaintiffs. Separately, Zebin Hossain sued Unilever in the Eastern District of New York in 2021 (No. 1:21-cv-02833), saying she lost hair from an allergic reaction to the preservative in TRESemme Keratin Smooth shampoo.

Suave Professionals Keratin Infusion (Unilever)

This older case involved a 30-day smoothing kit introduced in late 2011, not a shampoo. Women said the kit's active ingredient, thioglycolic acid, caused hair loss and scalp burns. It settled, and the Seventh Circuit upheld the settlement on March 28, 2016.

Native

We found no filed class action or settlement over hair loss from Native shampoo as of September 2026. Social media complaints and law firm investigation pages exist, but none we reviewed named a court or case number.

On December 28, 2022, Judge Gary Feinerman dismissed the consolidated TRESemme class action with prejudice. He noted that DMDM hydantoin was listed on the back label and found the plaintiffs had not stated a viable claim. A copycat case, Lewakowski v. Unilever, was dismissed on the same reasoning, and the plaintiff stipulated to dismissal with prejudice on January 2, 2024.

The individual TRESemme case went further. On July 30, 2026, Judge Natasha C. Merle excluded the plaintiff's dermatology expert, finding his causation opinion rested on insufficient facts and was unreliably applied, and then granted Unilever summary judgment because no other expert could prove causation. The plaintiff filed a notice of appeal on August 28, 2026.

In the OGX case, the court denied J&J's motion to strike the class allegations on May 17, 2023, which let the case continue. Summary judgment and expert motions followed. On September 25, 2026, the court entered an order on the summary judgment motion and an order dismissing the case, according to the docket. The written ruling was not yet available on the public docket when we checked, so the precise grounds are not confirmed here.

For what happens to class members when a case ends this way, see what happens if a class action loses.

The TRESemme class action had already been dismissed once before the final ruling. On March 9, 2022, the judge dismissed the plaintiffs' requests for injunctive relief for lack of jurisdiction and dismissed their money claims without prejudice, letting them replead. The second consolidated amended complaint, brought by ten named plaintiffs including Emily Castillo, Shannon Keener, and Robyn Lipetz, was then dismissed with prejudice. The OGX litigation was similarly fragmented at first: federal OGX suits filed in 2021 in the Northern District of California, the Central District of California, and New Jersey were closed between June 2021 and March 2022, leaving the Brooklyn case as the main vehicle. That case ran nearly five years, from November 23, 2021 to September 25, 2026, without a settlement.

With no open class action, the realistic path is an individual negligence or product liability claim. You are a stronger candidate if:

• You used a shampoo or conditioner containing DMDM hydantoin, or a smoothing treatment with harsh actives, and the hair loss began soon after.
• A doctor or dermatologist diagnosed contact dermatitis or an allergic reaction and noted the product.
• You have photos, receipts, and treatment bills.
• Your injury is recent enough to fall within your state's statute of limitations.

You probably do not have a claim if your hair loss started long after you stopped using the product, you never saw a clinician, or there is another likely cause. See class action vs. individual lawsuit for how the two paths differ.

If you are unsure whether your shampoo contained DMDM hydantoin, check the ingredient list on the back of the bottle or the brand's website. The TRESemme court noted the ingredient was listed on the back label of the Keratin Smooth products, which is one reason the class claims failed, but that same listing helps an individual prove what she used.

In the Suave settlement, Unilever created a $10,250,000 fund: $250,000 to reimburse the $10 cost of the product and $10 million for bodily injury claims. Injury payments depended on hairdresser or medical records showing treatment. In the WEN settlement, preliminarily approved in 2016, the highest tier covered people who lost more than half their hair with minimal regrowth.

Those numbers show the pattern: refunds are small, and meaningful money goes to people who can document an injury. Both settlements are long closed.

Personal injury limitations periods commonly run two to three years from the injury or from when you reasonably discovered its cause, though some states are shorter or longer. The OGX and TRESemme lawsuits were filed in 2020 and 2021. For hair loss that began in that period, many states' two- or three-year deadlines have already passed.

A pending class action can pause the clock for proposed class members, but the class cases here have been dismissed, and that pause generally ends when a class is denied or dismissed. If your injury is recent, act quickly.

The July 30, 2026 decision in Hossain v. Unilever is the most detailed court ruling so far on what it takes to prove a shampoo caused hair loss. It is worth reading as a checklist of what went wrong.

• The timeline worked against her. According to the order, she started using TRESemme Keratin Smooth in 2017, noticed hair loss in 2018, and kept washing with it every other day until early 2020.
• Her first doctor did not record scalp dermatitis. Her primary care physician's notes did not mention dermatitis, and he referred her to a dermatologist without diagnosing a cause.
• No patch test. Her expert, a board-certified dermatologist and allergist, agreed in testimony that patch testing is the gold standard for allergic contact dermatitis, but did not offer her one, even though that was his normal practice with patients.
• Other causes were not ruled out. The court noted the expert did not rule her hair dyeing in or out as a cause and did not address other diagnoses in her records.

The court held that an expert "must at least address obvious alternative causes and provide a reasonable explanation for dismissing" them, and excluded the opinion when he did not. Without that expert, the plaintiff had no evidence of causation, and Unilever won. She has appealed to the Second Circuit.

For anyone thinking about a claim today, the lessons are practical. See a dermatologist while symptoms are active, ask for patch testing, tell the doctor about every product and treatment you use (including dye and heat styling), and keep the product. A claim built this way is far stronger than one pieced together years later.

The two biggest hair product settlements are closed, but they show how injury-based hair product cases get resolved when they do settle.

WEN by Chaz Dean. A class action filed in January 2014 against Guthy-Renker, the marketer of WEN Cleansing Conditioners, claimed the products caused hair loss, breakage, and scalp irritation. A federal judge in Los Angeles gave preliminary approval to a $26.3 million settlement in 2016. Coverage at the time estimated roughly six million users could be eligible. Payments were split into tiers by severity, and the highest tier, for people who lost more than half their hair with minimal regrowth, ranged from $12,500 to $20,000. The companies maintained they settled only to avoid the cost of litigation.

Suave Professionals Keratin Infusion. The Suave kit, introduced in late 2011, was a 30-day smoothing treatment, not a daily shampoo. Women said its active ingredient, thioglycolic acid, caused hair loss and scalp burns. Unilever's $10,250,000 fund set aside $250,000 to refund the $10 product price to class members and $10 million for bodily injury claims, which required hairdresser or medical records showing treatment. The Seventh Circuit upheld the deal on March 28, 2016.

Both settlements rewarded documentation. People with records of treatment and photos received far more than those who simply bought the product.

1. Stop using the product and keep the bottle.
2. See a dermatologist. Ask about patch testing for DMDM hydantoin and formaldehyde, and make sure the product is noted in your chart.
3. Photograph your scalp regularly to document the injury and any regrowth.
4. Report the reaction to the FDA through MedWatch; it creates an independent record.
5. Do not sign releases from a manufacturer offering a refund without understanding what you give up.

If your hair loss is documented and recent, independent attorneys who handle cosmetic injury cases can tell you whether an individual claim is viable. A free case review takes about two minutes. You may also want to read about hair relaxer lawsuits and hair dye lawsuits, which involve different products and injuries.