A landmark case with legal fees as high as RMB 4.6 billion! Which law firms secured a share of this pie?

Lawyers from six law firms—Holland Law Firm, Ketchmark & McCreight, Seeger Weiss, Motley Rice, Williams Hart & Boundas, and Waters Kraus Paul & Siegel—filed the application for attorneys’ fees last Friday, seeking compensation for their work in negotiating and reaching a settlement agreement to resolve all current and future lawsuits alleging that Bayer’s herbicide ‘Roundup’ causes cancer. Christopher Seeger of Seeger Weiss stated in a press release that the proposed ‘Roundup’ settlement ranks among the largest class-action settlements in U.S. history—and the largest such settlement ever in Missouri—and noted that the requested 9.3% fee represents only a fraction—roughly one-third—of the typical benchmark fee courts approve in major class-action settlements. Mike Ketchmark of Ketchmark & McCreight wrote in an email: “What makes this case unique is that the class-action attorney team will continue working on it for another 17 years; this fee request reflects nearly two decades of additional work, risk, and expenses.” Other firms have not yet responded to requests for comment. In their filing, the six firms indicated that the $675 million in fees would also be distributed among other law firms representing plaintiffs in the case. Bayer’s subsidiary Monsanto stated in a press release that it looks forward to finalizing the settlement, which will establish a long-term claims program funded by annual capped payments over up to 21 years. The agreement covers the vast majority of pending lawsuits but requires judicial approval and a minimum threshold of plaintiff participation. The company has previously denied that glyphosate—the active ingredient in ‘Roundup’—causes cancer. If approved at the hearing scheduled for July, the $675 million fee award would surpass the $667 million and $657.1 million fees awarded in 2022 and 2025, respectively, in antitrust litigation against Blue Cross Blue Shield, as well as the $540 million fee awarded to lawyers in the $6.01 billion settlement reached with 3M in 2024. However, the highest attorneys’ fee award to date still far exceeds this request: In 2024, a federal judge ordered $956 million (approximately RMB 6.5 billion) in attorneys’ fees to plaintiffs’ counsel across two settlements totaling over $11 billion—cases in which plaintiffs represented public water systems suing major manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Michael Perino, a law professor at St. John’s University in New York, noted that judges consider multiple factors—including settlement value, time invested by counsel, and case complexity—when determining whether a fee award is reasonable.

In-depth industry report on thermal management materials: AIGC and new energy drive rising demand for liquid cooling solutions

Midstream device manufacturing in the thermal management materials sector comprises several key categories: • Thermal interface materials (TIMs): including thermal pads, thermal gels, thermal greases, and phase-change materials; • Thermal structural components: heat pipes, vapor chambers (VCs), cold plates, microchannel cold plates, heat sinks, and thermal modules; • Thermal substrates: DBC/AMB ceramic substrates, metal substrates, and composite thermal substrates; • Liquid-cooling core components: CDUs (Coolant Distribution Units), tubing, connectors, and seals. This midstream segment accounts for the largest value share and faces the most intense competition. Downstream applications constitute the end markets, where demand dictates technology selection. For example: • AI servers/data centers: High-power chips and high-density server racks rely primarily on liquid cooling; • New-energy vehicles: Electric drivetrains, batteries, on-board chargers (OBCs), and DC-DC converters mainly use liquid-cooled plates integrated into comprehensive thermal management systems; • Consumer electronics: Smartphones, laptops, and tablets predominantly adopt hybrid solutions combining graphite films, vapor chambers (VCs), and heat pipes; • Communications, industrial equipment, photovoltaics, and energy storage: Require highly reliable, long-lifespan thermal solutions. Downstream markets are characterized by large scale and relatively low gross margins—but they ultimately determine industry growth. (III) Foreign firms dominate high-end segments; domestic players are catching up—significant room remains for import substitution. China’s thermal management industry started relatively late. As advanced product technologies remain concentrated among a handful of firms in Europe, the U.S., and Japan, many domestic TIM manufacturers still focus primarily on mid-to-low-end products. In recent years, rapid growth in China’s smartphone supply chain, PC industry, and 5G-related data center infrastructure has accelerated the development of domestic thermal management materials. Moreover, the advent of the AI era—with its proliferation of high-power chips and AI data centers—is further propelling demand for high-performance thermal solutions. The first-tier global players in thermal management materials are largely headquartered in Europe, the U.S., and Japan—for instance, 3M and Henkel (U.S./Germany), Bergquist (U.S.), Shin-Etsu Chemical, Kyocera, and Toshiba (Japan). 3M historically specialized in TIMs, fluorinated liquids, and composite materials. On December 20, 2022, 3M announced plans to fully exit production of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)—dubbed “forever chemicals”—and aims to eliminate PFAS from its entire product portfolio by the end of 2025, amid mounting criticism and litigation concerning their health and environmental impacts. 3M supplies specialty coolants for semiconductor etching processes, commanding ~80% of global capacity, with clients including TSMC, Intel, Samsung, and SK Hynix. Its flagship products include thermal pads and phase-change materials. Following 3M’s complete withdrawal from China’s refrigerant business by the end of 2025, domestic Chinese refrigerant manufacturers stand to gain substantial market opportunities. Current import-substitution efforts fall into two main categories: • Electronic fluorinated liquids (for liquid cooling): Key listed domestic companies include Juhua Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Capchem Technology Co., Ltd. (New Bund), Dongyang Light Co., Ltd., and Haohua Chemical Group Co., Ltd.; • Conventional refrigerants (HFCs/HFOs): Key listed companies include Juhua Co., Ltd., Sanmei Co., Ltd., and Yonghe Co., Ltd. Juhua Co., Ltd.—China’s largest refrigerant producer—expects its net profit attributable to shareholders for 2025 to reach RMB 3.54–3.94 billion, representing year-on-year growth of 80%–101%. The primary driver behind Juhua’s significant earnings growth this period is the sustained recovery-driven price increase of its core fluorinated refrigerant products, coupled with stable output and sales volumes across its major product lines—leading to higher gross margins and increased profitability.

3M Argues Australia's $1.4 Billion PFAS Lawsuit Legally Flawed

15 hours ago

3M argues Australia's landmark PFAS lawsuit is legally flawed during a hearing seeking over A$2 billion in damages for military base contamination. The chemical giant contests public nuisance claims regarding firefighting foam pollution.

reuters

2026-10-15

3M Argues Australia's $1.4 Billion PFAS Lawsuit Legally Flawed

3M Argues Australia's $1.4 Billion PFAS Lawsuit Legally Flawed

FAQ