For decades, families in Allentown’s Hanover Township lived in the shadow of the B. Braun facility without knowing the invisible danger in the air. The medical supply plant at 901 Marcon Boulevard has been emitting ethylene oxide—a colorless gas the EPA classifies as carcinogenic—while sterilizing equipment. Now, a growing number of former neighbors and employees are coming forward with cancer diagnoses, each filing a B. Braun lawsuit that alleges the company knew about these risks but failed to protect the community.
Federal environmental data shows the B. Braun facility released enough ethylene oxide to put over 40,000 local residents at elevated cancer risk. What’s worse, the plant sits less than two miles from homes, schools, and businesses in a neighborhood where people have since reported unusual clusters of blood cancers and breast cancer cases. Several wrongful death claims have already been filed by grieving families.
This article breaks down what’s happening with the ethylene oxide litigation, who may qualify to take legal action, and how a B. Braun mass tort lawsuit attorney can help if you’ve been affected.
As of April 2026, B. Braun has won key parts of the litigation. It blocked a class-action case, won a jury verdict, and settled many of the remaining ethylene oxide claims. A few individual cases may still be moving forward, and some law firms are still accepting new claims related to exposure.
Here’s the latest on the B. Braun ethylene oxide exposure lawsuits:
March 13, 2026: EPA Moves to Roll Back Ethylene Oxide Limits Despite Cancer Risk Concerns
The EPA is proposing to scale back parts of its 2024 ethylene oxide rules, including limits aimed at cutting emissions from sterilization facilities by about 90 percent. The change would remove requirements for continuous emissions monitoring and fully enclosed systems designed to prevent releases. Ethylene oxide is still widely used to sterilize heat-sensitive medical devices, and the EPA cites supply chain concerns as part of its reasoning. The proposal also moves away from earlier findings, including a 2016 assessment that linked the chemical to significantly higher cancer risk.
March 4, 2026: Ethylene Oxide Cancer Lawsuit in Colorado Settles Before Jury Deliberations
A Colorado lawsuit claiming cancer from ethylene oxide exposure settled just before closing arguments were set to begin. The case alleged that emissions from a Terumo-operated sterilization facility exposed nearby residents over several years and caused a rare cancer. The plaintiff pointed to filtration issues and long-term exposure, while the defense argued emissions were too low to cause harm and met regulations. The settlement amount was not disclosed. The case is part of broader ethylene oxide litigation, which has seen mixed outcomes in court.
February 24, 2026: Illinois Supreme Court Limits Insurance Coverage in Griffith Foods Ethylene Oxide Case
In Griffith Foods International, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that regulatory approval to emit pollution does not prevent insurers from applying a pollution exclusion in commercial general liability policies. The dispute involved ethylene oxide emissions from a sterilization facility in Willowbrook, where residents alleged long-term exposure caused cancer and other illnesses. The court held that the policy’s language controls and that permitted emissions can still fall under the exclusion. In doing so, the court overruled earlier Illinois appellate decisions that treated regulatory approval as creating ambiguity.
January 30, 2026: Jury Hears Openings in Ethylene Oxide Exposure Trial
A federal jury in Colorado has begun hearing a trial involving claims that companies exposed workers and nearby residents to ethylene oxide without proper warnings or safety measures. The plaintiffs allege the companies knew or should have known about the risks of the chemical, which is classified as a carcinogen, and that long-term exposure led to cancer and other illnesses. The defense argues the companies followed regulations and disputes any link between exposure and injury. The case features competing expert testimony and reflects broader toxic exposure litigation trends.
January 27, 2026: Federal Agencies Continue to Flag Health Risks Linked to Ethylene Oxide Exposure
Federal agencies continue to point to health risks tied to ethylene oxide, a chemical used to sterilize medical equipment. The EPA classifies it as a known human carcinogen and has adopted stricter controls aimed at reducing emissions by about 90 percent, while also signaling plans to lower workplace exposure limits by 2035. However, OSHA’s exposure standard has not been updated since 1984, raising concerns that workers may face higher-than-recommended levels. Long-term exposure has been linked to several cancers, and nearby communities in multiple states have reported elevated cancer risks.
January 16, 2026: Gaps in Ethylene Oxide Oversight Raise Worker Safety Concerns
The EPA is facing scrutiny over gaps in how it regulates ethylene oxide, a chemical used in medical sterilization that is linked to cancer. Reports suggest some facilities operate without full emissions controls, exposing workers to long-term risks. The chemical has been tied to cancers such as leukemia and breast cancer, with studies indicating significantly higher risk from prolonged exposure. Critics say enforcement has been inconsistent and OSHA standards have not kept pace with current research. Communities near these facilities also face elevated risks, adding to concerns about worker safety and potential legal claims.
January 13, 2026: Pennsylvania Court Rejects Class Action in B. Braun Ethylene Oxide Case
A Pennsylvania court denied class action status in an ethylene oxide lawsuit tied to emissions from B. Braun’s sterilization facility in Hanover Township. The ruling limits the case to individual claims rather than a broader group seeking medical monitoring. The plaintiff alleged long-term exposure to ethylene oxide emissions increased cancer risk for nearby residents. The court found the plaintiff did not meet several requirements for class certification, including credible evidence of the class size. While the claims were considered typical, the proposed class was not certified due to these deficiencies.
January 6, 2026: Insurance Rulings Impact Sterigenics Ethylene Oxide Lawsuits
Recent court rulings are shaping whether insurers must cover defense costs in ethylene oxide lawsuits involving Sterigenics. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that B. Braun must pay its own defense costs, finding that policy exclusions applied to claims involving long-term exposure near its facility. The decision highlights how exposure allegations and internal emissions data can affect both liability and insurance coverage. Courts are now closely examining whether such claims fall within pollution exclusions, making insurance coverage a key issue in ongoing litigation.
December 23, 2025: Colorado Advances Ethylene Oxide Emission Controls, April Hearing Set
Colorado air regulators are moving forward with a rulemaking hearing in April to set new state-level controls on toxic air contaminants, including ethylene oxide. The rules would largely align with recent federal standards and apply to medical sterilization facilities such as Terumo BCT in Lakewood. Regulators say the approach allows faster action while avoiding overlapping rules, though it limits stricter local enforcement for now. The commission plans to focus on higher-risk communities and will evaluate whether the proposed limits are strong enough to reduce long-term cancer risks linked to ethylene oxide exposure.
November 26, 2025: West Virginia Ethylene Oxide Lawsuit Focuses on Cumulative Air Pollution
A lawsuit filed in Kanawha County, West Virginia, alleges that long-term ethylene oxide emissions from multiple industrial sites created dangerous levels of cancer-causing pollution in the Kanawha Valley. The case, brought by residents including Cathy Flint, claims decades of exposure led to serious illness. Plaintiffs argue that while individual facilities may have met EPA limits, the combined emissions raised cancer risks well above acceptable levels. The defendants deny liability and point to regulatory compliance. The case is ongoing and seeks to address cumulative emissions and require stronger monitoring.
November 18, 2025: Griffith v. National Union Case Reaches Illinois Supreme Court Over Insurance Coverage
The Illinois Supreme Court is reviewing Griffith Foods International, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, a dispute over whether ethylene oxide emissions permitted under state law are still subject to pollution exclusions in commercial general liability insurance policies. The case involves Sterigenics and its former parent company seeking coverage for defense costs tied to lawsuits over emissions from its Willowbrook facility. The court is considering whether permitted emissions qualify as “traditional environmental pollution,” with the insurer arguing the exclusion applies regardless of permits. The outcome could shape future pollution coverage disputes.
November 3, 2025: Sterigenics v. Residents of Smyrna Emissions Cases Revived by Georgia Appeals Court
The Georgia Court of Appeals vacated a lower court ruling in eight toxic tort cases involving alleged ethylene oxide emissions from Sterigenics’ Smyrna facility. In Sterigenics v. Residents of Smyrna, the court found that the trial judge misapplied the standard for expert testimony and improperly excluded experts who linked exposure to increased cancer and birth defect risks. The appellate court sent the case back for further review of the expert evidence and causation issues. The decision allows plaintiffs to present expert testimony, moving the long-running emissions litigation forward.
October 28, 2025: Exemptions Undermine Trust in Ethylene Oxide Oversight
Communities near sterilization plants are pushing back after federal exemptions were granted to EPA rules meant to cut ethylene oxide emissions by 90%, including for Sterigenics in Smyrna, Georgia. Ethylene oxide is a known carcinogen, and the area was once flagged for high cancer risk. While Georgia requires more reporting, oversight still relies on self-reporting with little independent testing. Residents question the exemptions, and neither Sterigenics nor regulators have responded.
October 22, 2025: Colorado Sets Health-Based Limits on Ethylene Oxide and Other Air Toxins
Colorado regulators approved the state’s first health-based limits on toxic air pollutants, including ethylene oxide, marking a shift toward stricter controls on chemicals linked to cancer and respiratory illness. The new standards follow years of advocacy and align with a one-in-a-million cancer risk threshold. Ethylene oxide has drawn attention after lawsuits tied to emissions from a facility in Lakewood. While advocates support the move, some criticized changes to non-cancer risk levels. The state will now develop enforcement plans, with final rules expected by April 2026.
October 21, 2025: Covington Residents Sue BD Over Ethylene Oxide Emissions
Over 300 Covington, Georgia residents have filed lawsuits against Becton Dickinson and Company over alleged long-term ethylene oxide emissions from its sterilization plant. Plaintiffs claim exposure from the facility, located near homes and schools, led to cancers including breast cancer, lymphoma, and leukemia. The company says it operates safely and has upgraded controls to capture most emissions. The litigation follows a prior $20 million verdict tied to occupational exposure and is scheduled for trial next year, with potential implications for similar cases nationwide.
October 20, 2025: El Paso Residents Raise Concerns Over Ethylene Oxide Exposure Near Cardinal Health Sites
El Paso residents are raising concerns after reports suggested ethylene oxide emissions near Cardinal Health warehouses may exceed federal safety limits. Modeling indicates much of the city could face elevated cancer risk, with higher risk levels closest to the facilities. A former worker was later diagnosed with breast cancer, raising further questions about long-term exposure, though a direct link has not been confirmed. Residents also report health symptoms like headaches and breathing issues. Cardinal Health has not responded, while Texas regulators say the facilities meet current standards.
September 24, 2025: Colorado Sets Ethylene Oxide Limits, But Enforcement Unclear
Colorado regulators set the state’s first health-based exposure limit for ethylene oxide, aiming to reduce long-term cancer risk to one in a million people. The rule reflects growing concern over the chemical’s link to cancer, especially near sterilization facilities. However, critics say the commission weakened protections for non-cancer health effects. The standard still needs legislative approval and will not take effect for at least a year, with enforcement details, including permitting and monitoring, still unclear.
September 15, 2025: Sommerville v. Union Carbide Corp. Expands Standing in Ethylene Oxide Case
In Sommerville v. Union Carbide Corp., the Fourth Circuit revived a dismissed ethylene oxide exposure lawsuit and allowed a medical monitoring claim to proceed without proof of a current illness. The court said exposure and the cost of ongoing medical testing can count as present injury, even if cancer has not developed. The case involves alleged emissions from a facility in West Virginia. The ruling expands how courts view standing in toxic exposure cases and may make it easier for plaintiffs to bring similar claims based on exposure and monitoring costs.
August 29, 2025: Investigation Continues Into Cancer Risks Near Fort Myers Ethylene Oxide Facility
An investigation is ongoing into potential cancer risks linked to the American Contract Systems facility in South Fort Myers, which uses ethylene oxide to sterilize medical equipment. The chemical is classified as a carcinogen, and earlier emissions were associated with increased cancer risks for nearby residents and workers. After EPA concerns in 2023, the facility added air controls, and a later inspection found risks below the agency’s threshold. Residents remain concerned about past exposure, and the investigation could lead to claims involving negligence or failure to warn.
August 6, 2025: Study Finds Long-Term Ethylene Oxide Overexposure in U.S. Workplaces
A peer-reviewed study in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine found widespread ethylene oxide overexposure across U.S. workplaces. Reviewing OSHA data from 1979 to 2020, researchers found many air samples exceeded recommended exposure limits, especially in industrial sterilization, where exposure levels remained consistently high. While overall exposure has declined since the 1980s, gaps in data and limited monitoring in some industries raise concerns. The study highlights ongoing risks tied to ethylene oxide, a known carcinogen, and calls for stronger monitoring and enforcement in high-risk workplaces.
July 28, 2025: Eastman Chemical Ethylene Oxide Lawsuit Filed Over Texas Cancer Claims
A federal lawsuit has been filed against Eastman Chemical Company, alleging that long-term ethylene oxide emissions from its Longview, Texas facility caused cancer in nearby residents. The case involves six plaintiffs, including several breast cancer diagnoses, who claim they were exposed to harmful levels of the toxic, odorless gas. The EPA has classified ethylene oxide as a probable human carcinogen and previously flagged the area for elevated cancer risk. The lawsuit alleges negligence and seeks damages for health impacts and loss of consortium.
July 21, 2025: EPA Ethylene Oxide Rules Blocked Amid Cancer Risk Findings
New documents show that proposed EPA rules on ethylene oxide emissions were delayed after intervention from political officials, despite warnings from agency scientists about cancer risks. The 2020 proposal would have required major emission reductions and public health notifications, but it was withdrawn following review by the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Internal changes also softened language describing the chemical as cancer-causing. The delay allowed continued use of ethylene oxide with limited oversight and has become relevant in ongoing lawsuits alleging long-term exposure caused cancer.
July 17, 2025: Air Tests Show Elevated Ethylene Oxide Levels
New air testing found ethylene oxide levels in some U.S. communities far above EPA cancer risk thresholds, with readings hundreds of times higher than expected. The results raise concerns about underreported emissions and are being cited in lawsuits alleging long-term exposure caused cancer and other health issues.
July 15, 2025: Federal Review of HON Rule Raises Ethylene Oxide Concerns
Federal regulators are reviewing possible exemptions to emissions limits under the HON (Hazardous Organic NESHAP) rule, which could affect facilities that release ethylene oxide and other pollutants. The rule is intended to reduce cancer risks in communities near industrial plants, but proposed exemptions would allow delays in installing pollution controls if compliance is deemed difficult. Critics warn this could weaken protections and increase exposure to ethylene oxide, a known carcinogen linked to several cancers, especially in high-risk communities.
July 14, 2025: Delaware Raises Pollution Fines, Funds Local Communities
Delaware lawmakers passed a bill increasing fines for environmental violations and directing penalty funds to communities near the pollution source. The law gives the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control more enforcement power and raises daily fines to as much as $30,000. Supporters say it strengthens accountability for chronic polluters, while critics argue it could raise costs for businesses and insurers.
June 25, 2025: NC Ethylene Oxide Exposure Concerns
A WRAL report found North Carolina residents may be exposed to ethylene oxide from nearby storage warehouses, including one just 1,100 feet from homes. The facilities are not regulated for emissions, and residents are calling for more monitoring and transparency.
June 10, 2025: Steris Ethylene Oxide Settlement
Steris Corporation agreed to pay up to $48.15 million to settle lawsuits tied to ethylene oxide emissions from its former Waukegan, Illinois facility. Plaintiffs allege the emissions between 2005 and 2008 caused cancer and other health issues in nearby residents. The settlement, disclosed in a securities filing, is meant to resolve most pending cases in Cook County Circuit Court but still requires court approval and plaintiff participation. Steris does not admit liability and can withdraw from the agreement if conditions are not met.
May 21, 2025: Retrial Ordered in $20M Ethylene Oxide Case
A Georgia judge ordered a retrial on punitive damages in a lawsuit against C.R. Bard after a $20 million compensatory verdict. The original $50 million punitive award was voided after a juror said they did not fully agree with the decision. The new trial will decide whether Bard should pay additional damages for alleged reckless conduct tied to ethylene oxide exposure at its Covington, Georgia facility. The plaintiff claims long-term exposure led to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
May 16, 2025: Sterigenics Ethylene Oxide Trial Set for 2026
A trial is scheduled for March 2026 in Atlanta involving claims that Sterigenics released ethylene oxide from its Cobb County, Georgia facility. The lawsuit alleges that residents were unknowingly exposed for years to the carcinogenic gas due to a lack of proper emission controls and warnings. Plaintiffs say the company failed to inform the public about the risks until after outside scrutiny, and that the exposure is linked to serious health issues, including cancer.
May 2, 2025: $20M Verdict in Georgia Ethylene Oxide Case
A Georgia jury awarded $20 million to a retired truck driver who alleged that ethylene oxide exposure from C.R. Bard’s Covington facility caused his lymphoma. The jury found Bard liable for negligence and nuisance, and a second phase will decide punitive damages. The plaintiff, who lived and worked near the plant, was diagnosed with lymphoma in 2017. Evidence presented at trial included documents suggesting Bard delayed installing emissions controls despite warnings from regulators.
April 16, 2025: Georgia Trial Begins Over Ethylene Oxide Exposure Claims
A Georgia jury began hearing claims that C.R. Bard’s Covington facility exposed a resident to ethylene oxide for decades, allegedly causing his cancer. The plaintiff argues the plant emitted large amounts of the gas and operated without proper controls for years. Bard denies the allegations, saying the cancer is unrelated and that it follows required safety standards. The case is part of broader ethylene oxide litigation across the country.
March 24, 2025: Steris Agrees to $48 Million Settlement in Illinois Ethylene Oxide Lawsuits
Steris Corporation agreed to pay up to $48.15 million to resolve lawsuits tied to ethylene oxide emissions from its former Waukegan, Illinois facility. The claims allege the emissions between 2005 and 2008 caused cancer and other health issues in nearby residents. The settlement, which still requires court approval, would resolve nearly all pending cases in Cook County. Steris does not admit liability and says the payment is meant to settle the claims efficiently.
February 18, 2025: B. Braun Ethylene Oxide Cases Settle
Braun reached a confidential settlement to resolve most lawsuits alleging ethylene oxide emissions from its Lehigh County, Pennsylvania facility exposed nearby residents to cancer risks. The claims involved long-term exposure linked to serious illnesses such as breast cancer and lymphoma. While the company denies wrongdoing, it says it installed emissions controls that significantly reduced output and will continue defending any remaining claims.
November 15, 2024: Cosmed Files for Bankruptcy Over Ethylene Oxide Lawsuits
Cosmed Group filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy after facing hundreds of lawsuits alleging its use of ethylene oxide caused cancer and other health issues. The claims involve exposure from its sterilization facilities and span multiple states. The filing follows mounting legal pressure and more than $100 million in reported liabilities. The company has not yet said whether it will pursue a global settlement as part of the bankruptcy process.
May 22, 2024: Sterigenics Reaches $35M Georgia Settlement
Sterigenics and its parent company agreed to pay $35 million to settle lawsuits alleging that ethylene oxide emissions from a Cobb County, Georgia facility caused cancer and other health issues. The claims stem from a case involving a plaintiff diagnosed with leukemia after years of living near the plant. The companies deny wrongdoing but agreed to resolve the claims, pending full plaintiff participation.
April 9, 2024: EPA Tightens Ethylene Oxide Emissions Rule
The EPA finalized a rule aimed at reducing emissions of ethylene oxide and other hazardous air pollutants from chemical manufacturing facilities. The rule requires emissions cuts, public fenceline monitoring, and is expected to significantly lower cancer risks for nearby communities.
February 29, 2024: EPA Tightens Ethylene Oxide Rules
The EPA finalized new rules to limit ethylene oxide emissions from sterilization facilities and strengthen worker safety requirements. The update follows growing concerns over cancer risks tied to long-term exposure. While the rule sets stricter limits and compliance timelines, critics say it does not go far enough, particularly in addressing monitoring and off-site emissions. Industry groups warn the changes could increase costs and affect the medical device supply chain.
June 23, 2023: Sterigenics Ethylene Oxide Settlement
Sterigenics and its parent company, Sotera Health, agreed to a $408 million settlement with 879 plaintiffs who alleged ethylene oxide emissions from the Willowbrook, Illinois facility caused cancer and other health issues. The claims followed EPA findings of elevated emissions before the plant was shut down in 2019. The settlement resolves nearly all pending cases, though a few plaintiffs opted out and will continue their claims. The litigation gained momentum after a major jury verdict in favor of plaintiff Susan Kamuda, which helped drive the global settlement.
August 3, 2022: EPA Expands Ethylene Oxide Outreach
The EPA launched a nationwide initiative to educate communities about ethylene oxide exposure risks. The effort includes public meetings, webinars, and updated risk data for residents living near nearly 100 sterilization facilities, with 23 identified as higher cancer risk sites. Michael Regan, the EPA Administrator, emphasized the agency’s focus on transparency and community engagement. The campaign highlights long-term exposure risks tied to cancers such as breast cancer and leukemia, especially for workers and children.
December 27, 2021: EPA Expands TRI Reporting
The EPA expanded Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reporting to 29 sterilization facilities that use large amounts of ethylene oxide and ethylene glycol. Reporting will begin in 2023, based on data from January 2022. Under Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), the agency will require emissions and waste reporting for facilities expected to exceed the 10,000 pounds per year TRI threshold. The move targets high-use sites in the sterilization industry to improve transparency around ethylene oxide exposure risks.
B. Braun is a family-owned medical supply company based in Melsungen, Germany. What started as a small pharmacy in 1839 has grown into a global healthcare manufacturer with operations in more than 60 countries and a team of over 63,000 employees.
The company makes a huge range of medical products, everything from IV bags and infusion pumps to surgical tools, dialysis machines, and wound care supplies. Today, B. Braun offers over 5,000 different medical devices and pharmaceutical products used in hospitals around the world.
Here in the U.S., B. Braun runs several facilities, including a major plant in Allentown, Pennsylvania. This location handles both the manufacturing and sterilization of medical devices, using ethylene oxide (EtO) gas. The FDA considers EtO essential for sterilizing certain products that can’t withstand heat or steam, especially those made from softer plastics and polymers.
Ethylene oxide (EtO) is a colorless, odorless gas used to sterilize certain medical products, especially those made from materials that can’t handle heat or steam. It’s effective because it damages DNA, which is exactly what makes it dangerous to humans, too.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classifies ethylene oxide as a known human carcinogen. Despite its risks, EtO is still widely used because of how well it sterilizes medical devices without harming delicate materials.
In fact, B. Braun’s facility in Allentown uses ethylene oxide to sterilize its products. Over time, those emissions have made the company one of the largest EtO polluters in the country. According to federal data, B. Braun has been among the top 15 EtO polluters nationwide, and the largest in Pennsylvania.
Back in 2016, the EPA updated its risk assessment and found that ethylene oxide is 30 times more carcinogenic than previously believed. That revelation has since sparked a wave of lawsuits and growing public concern, especially in communities near EtO-emitting plants.
Ethylene oxide is a gas used at the B. Braun facility in Allentown to sterilize medical equipment. It’s colorless and often has no noticeable smell. People living or working nearby might’ve been exposed without realizing it was even there.
When inhaled, even at low levels, it can cause:
With more frequent or longer exposure, some people have also dealt with:
Many of these symptoms are easy to overlook or blame on something else. But now that more people are looking into what’s been happening around the B. Braun plant, those symptoms are taking on a different meaning.
Decades of research, including studies by the CDC and National Cancer Institute, confirm what many families near sterilization plants are now discovering: prolonged ethylene oxide exposure can rewrite your body’s cellular blueprint. The strongest evidence links chronic EtO exposure to blood and immune system cancers, including:
There’s also growing concern around EtO’s connection to breast cancer, particularly in communities living near sterilization facilities like the B. Braun plant in Allentown.
Unlike short-term symptoms, the health effects from chronic EtO exposure often don’t show up right away. It can take years for someone to be diagnosed, which makes connecting the dots even harder. Now, as more former workers and neighbors receive cancer diagnoses, those patterns are becoming harder to ignore and that’s why B. Braun lawsuits are on the rise.
The EPA has rolled out new rules aimed at cutting ethylene oxide emissions from commercial sterilizers, B. Braun included. These changes are meant to lower health risks for people living near facilities like the one in Allentown.
In Pennsylvania, the EPA is working directly with state officials to reduce EtO emissions at B. Braun’s plant. They’ve been helping the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) and other state agencies figure out how to better monitor and manage pollution from these sterilizers.
On a larger scale, the EPA is also reviewing how EtO is used and controlled across the industry. That includes looking at current equipment, newer sterilization methods, what’s cost-effective, and where the biggest gaps are in regulation.
To support this work locally, the EPA awarded nearly $500,000 through the American Rescue Plan to PADEP, Lehigh University, and Promise Neighborhoods Lehigh Valley. That funding is being used for air monitoring, health studies, and community outreach in Allentown, specifically to address concerns tied to B. Braun’s emissions.
According to investigations by Kline & Specter, B. Braun has been releasing ethylene oxide into the air around its Allentown-area plant since at least the 1980s. EPA data from its National Air Toxics Assessment shows that people living near the facility in Hanover Township faced a cancer risk 200 times higher than the average Pennsylvanian.
What makes this worse is that B. Braun reportedly knew the risks. Documents show the company was aware that EtO is a toxic, cancer-causing chemical. Yet, they continued operations without reducing emissions or warning their workers and neighbors. In 2014 alone, B. Braun released 6,800 pounds of ethylene oxide. For comparison, the second-highest emitter in the area, St. Luke’s University Hospital, emitted just 17 pounds that same year.
At one point, B. Braun even sent a letter to the Lehigh County Fire Department acknowledging that the gas used at their facility was both toxic and carcinogenic. The company reportedly took air readings around the plant but failed to keep the data or share the results with the public.
Despite everything they knew, the company continued to host employee events, including holiday parties attended by workers and their families, right at the facility.
The lawsuits against B. Braun stem from a growing number of former employees and local residents who believe long-term exposure to ethylene oxide from the company’s Allentown sterilization plant led to serious health problems, most notably cancer.
EtO is a gas B. Braun uses to sterilize medical equipment. It’s also recognized as a carcinogen. Over the years, the company is alleged to have released unsafe levels of it into the air around its facility. The people filing these lawsuits say they were never warned and never given a chance to protect themselves.
Many of the claims involve cancers like leukemia, lymphoma, and breast cancer. Plaintiffs argue that B. Braun could have done more, like installing better pollution controls or, at the very least, alerting the community to the potential risks.
Braun has pushed back hard. In December 2024, the company won a trial where a jury found itwasn’tresponsible for a former employee’s leukemia. But in early 2025, B. Braun agreed to a confidential settlement that resolved most of the remaining cancer claims. The company’s ethylene oxide litigation is still ongoing.
These lawsuits aren’t just happening in Allentown. Across the country, other sterilization facilities are also under scrutiny for their EtO emissions. But for the families affected here, the B. Braun plant is where the fight begins.
Many of the lawsuits filed against B. Braun center around one core issue: people who lived or worked near the company’s Allentown sterilization facility say they got sick, some with cancer, because of long-term exposure to ethylene oxide.
Here’s what these claims often include:
Braun has pushed back on these accusations, saying they followed the law and met all industry safety standards. In one high-profileB. Braun cancer lawsuitfrom December 2024, a jury sided with the company, ruling that a former worker’s leukemia wasn’t linked to EtO exposure. But just a few months later, in February 2025, B. Braun agreed to a confidential settlement covering most of the lawsuits filed by local residents, though a number of cases are still pending.
This isn’t just happening in Allentown. Similar lawsuits are being filed across the country, as communities near commercial sterilizers raise concerns about the long-term effects of EtO.
The lawsuits tied to B. Braun’s sterilization plant in Allentown center around one thing: ethylene oxide, a gas used to sterilize medical equipment that’s also classified as a carcinogen. People who lived or worked near the plant are filing claims after being diagnosed with cancer or other serious illnesses, saying the company is legally responsible for their exposure.
Many of these lawsuits point to a pattern: years of emissions, a lack of transparency, and now, clusters of cancer cases in the surrounding neighborhoods.
If you believe you’ve been exposed to ethylene oxide, don’t wait around.
Here’s what to do right away:
Even if symptoms don’t show up right away, it’s important to get medical attention. EtO can cause serious problems that don’t show up for a day or two.
If you’ve been diagnosed with cancer and think it might be tied to exposure from B. Braun’s Allentown plant, here’s a clear outline of how to get the legal process started.
Just keep in mind that there are strict deadlines for these kinds of cases. Don’t wait too long to speak with a lawyer. Getting started early gives your legal team more time to build a strong case and helps protect your right to file.
If you’re thinking about filing a B. Braun lawsuit over ethylene oxide exposure from B. Braun Allentown, PA‘s facility,
here’s what financial recovery could look like:
In early 2025, B. Braun settled most of the cancer lawsuits tied to its Lehigh County facility. The details weren’t made public, but these settlements often come with financial compensation, even if the company doesn’t admit wrongdoing. Similar ethylene oxide cases have ended in large payouts. Sterigenics settled for $35 million in Georgia, and Steris paid $48 million in Illinois.
You may have a claim worth exploring if you were diagnosed with cancer after living or working near B. Braun Allentown, Pennsylvania facility. A B. Braun mass tort lawsuit attorney can help you understand how ethylene oxide exposure might be connected and what legal options you have. These cases often come down to clear medical records and strong environmental links, so the sooner you act, the better. If you’re thinking about filing a B. Braun lawsuit, EOL.Law offers free consultations to help you get answers and take the next step with confidence.
These lawsuits are about claims that B. Braun exposed people to a cancer-causing gas at its Allentown facility. People say the company released too much ethylene oxide over the years without enough safety measures or warnings. They’re asking for compensation and medical monitoring. So far, B. Braun has won a major trial and fought off a class action, while settling many cases quietly.
The facility is in Allentown, Pennsylvania. It’s on Marcon Boulevard in Hanover Township and has been running since the 1980s. The site uses ethylene oxide to sterilize medical equipment. It’s a large operation with many employees and recent expansions.
Ethylene oxide exposure is linked to cancer and other serious health issues. Short-term exposure can cause irritation, headaches, nausea, and breathing problems. Long-term exposure has been tied to cancers like leukemia and lymphoma, as well as nerve and reproductive issues. The level and length of exposure matter when it comes to risk.
Plaintiffs allege B. Braun knowingly released excessive ethylene oxide without adequate controls. The facility emitted 6,800 pounds in 2014 alone. Neighbors and workers faced cancer risks up to 200 times normal levels. Lawsuits also claim B. Braun failed to warn residents and downplayed dangers.
Yes. B. Braun has had some wins in court. In late 2024, a jury ruled in the company’s favor in a case involving a worker’s leukemia claim. In early 2026, a court also denied class action status. These decisions made it harder for large group cases to move forward. Individual cases can still be filed.
Yes, many of the cases have been settled. In 2025, B. Braun resolved a large number of claims through private agreements. The company did not admit wrongdoing as part of those deals. Some cases are still ongoing and being handled one by one.
B. Braun says it has taken steps to reduce emissions. The company installed updated systems to capture and break down ethylene oxide before it’s released. These upgrades are meant to lower overall emissions significantly. According to B. Braun, the facility now meets regulatory limits.
No, there isn’t an active class action right now. A court denied class certification in 2026. The judge found issues with how the case was set up and the evidence behind it. That means claims have to be handled individually.
You may qualify if you lived or worked within four miles of the Allentown facility for at least one year during peak emissions and received a diagnosis of an ethylene oxide-linked cancer like leukemia or lymphoma. Gather medical records and proof of residency. Contact a toxic exposure lawyer for a free case review.
You can call EOL.Law for a free case review. We handle toxic exposure cases and can look at your situation. We’ll go over your records and help you understand if you may have a claim. From there, you can decide what to do next.
If you want a lawyer who cares about you and the outcome of your b braun lawsuit, choose Ethen Ostroff. He and his professional connections ensure you get every dollar possible for what you went through.
His career began in public service as a Surveillance Officer in Maricopa County, where he gained firsthand experience in high-stakes decision-making and developed a deep sense of discipline and accountability. He later served as Chief Operating Officer of a fast-growing law firm, driving efficiency, revenue growth, and team development. Today, Ryan focuses on helping law firms reach their full potential by aligning people, processes, and long-term vision. A strategic thinker and empowering leader, Ryan is passionate about developing others and guiding organizations through meaningful, lasting growth.
Passionate about securing legal rights, Joseph actively participates in pro bono work through various organizations, including Christian Legal Aid of Pittsburgh and the ABA Military Pro Bono Project. Licensed to practice in Pennsylvania and the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, he is a member of the Allegheny County and Pennsylvania Bar Associations. Outside of work, Joseph enjoys sports, reading, and creative writing, and has been involved in rowing and curling. He resides in Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania, with his parents.
Nicholas began his post-graduate career clerking for the Honorable Linda Rovder Fleming in the Cambria County Court of Common Pleas. From there, he quickly found his calling in workers’ compensation, personal injury, and Social Security disability law—areas where he could directly impact people’s lives in moments of crisis. He’s helped clients navigate complex legal claims, including securing a settlement exceeding $300,000.
Nicholas brings clear communication, genuine empathy, and an unrelenting drive to achieve the best outcomes for his clients. Whether he’s navigating a complex workers’ comp claim or pushing for a major settlement, he brings focus, dedication, and deep legal knowledge to every case.
He’s also a proud member of Pennsylvania Advocates for Justice and remains active in various professional legal organizations. Nicholas is licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania.
When he’s not fighting for the injured, Nicholas is enjoying time with his family, kicking a soccer ball around, hitting the golf course, or cheering on Pittsburgh’s local teams.
Joe Ring heads the workers’ compensation department at Ethen Ostroff Law, where he takes pride in fighting for injured workers.
Joe is a Philadelphia native and maintains deep roots in the area. As the grandson of a Philadelphia Firefighter, son of a Philadelphia public school teacher, and veteran of the United State Marine Corps, he was taught to value service, dedication, and hard work. He applies these values to every case and takes great satisfaction in representing hard-working clients with those same traits.
After obtaining his bachelor’s degree in history from St. Vincent College in Western Pennsylvania, he graduated from Villanova Law School in 2012 and, since then, has litigated hundreds of workers’ compensation hearings and trial depositions on behalf of both employers and injured workers. During this time, Mr. Ring has written articles and presented Continuing Legal Education courses on developments in Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Law. He is active in local professional organizations, and, in 2022, he served a Co-chairperson of the Philadelphia Bar Associations Workers’ Compensation Section.
Since coming to EOL in 2024, he has dedicated his practice entirely to helping injured workers navigate the system and obtain their rightful benefits.
Joe is licensed to practice in Pennsylvania.
Brandon Zanan heads the personal injury claim department with Ethen Ostroff Law.
Brandon’s education in both law and medicine assist him in expertly representing badly injured victims. Brandon has a Master’s Degree in Forensic Medicine from the Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, with a concentration in anatomy and pathology. With this knowledge, Brandon is skilled at analyzing medical records and understanding injuries that are common in personal injury claims. He uses this expertise in conjunction with listening carefully to each client’s needs, in order to fiercely advocate for clients and tell their stories when they would not otherwise have a voice.
Brandon’s background includes a variety of experience and skills in various areas of civil practice. He is the author and editor of numerous books for the George T. Bisel Publishing Company, including “Pennsylvania Damages” and the “Pennsylvania Vehicle Code Annotated,” two texts that are frequently relied on by lawyers and judges across Pennsylvania as authoritative resources on personal injury law.
Brandon is a member of the Pennsylvania and Montgomery Bar Associations. He is also a member of Pennsylvania Association for Justice, and has served as an executive board member of the Montgomery American Inn of Court.
He is admitted to practice in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the United States District Courts for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and Middle District of Pennsylvania, the State of New Jersey, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, and in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Brandon has represented many clients in motor vehicle, premises liability, animal bite, and products liability cases across Pennsylvania and New Jersey and has obtained outstanding results with millions of dollars recovered for his clients.
He has been named a Pennsylvania Rising Star from 2021 onward. The “Super Lawyers-Rising Star®”, list recognizes no more than 2.5 percent of attorneys in each state
Brandon currently lives in Malvern with his wife Rachel and their son Max.
Effective Date: July 10, 2024
General Information
Welcome to the website of Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC (“EO”). By accessing or using our website, you agree to be bound by these Terms and Conditions (“Terms”). If you do not agree with these Terms, please do not use our website.
Use
EO hereby grants you a non-exclusive, non-transferable, revocable, limited right and license to access and use the Site solely for your personal use in accordance with these Terms of Use. You shall not, in any way, otherwise copy, reproduce, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, modify, create derivative works from, sell, or exploit the Site.
EO may at any time, for any reason, and without notice or liability: (a) modify, suspend, or terminate operation of or access to the Site and related services, or (b) change, revise, or modify the Site and affiliated services.
Messaging and Automated Calls
When you opt-in, you will receive text messages (SMS/MMS) on your mobile number. These messages may contain information about your case, and the message frequency may vary from user to user. Please note that message and data rates may apply. If you wish to opt out of this service, you can do so anytime by simply texting “STOP” to the phone number. Once you text “STOP” to us, we will send you an SMS to confirm that you have been unsubscribed. If you encounter any issues, you can reply with the keyword “HELP” to get assistance. Please be aware that carriers are not responsible for any delayed or undelivered messages.
By providing your phone number and submitting a form on our website, you consent to receive communications, including automated calls, texts, and pre-recorded messages, from EO and its affiliates. These communications may include updates about your case, promotional offers, and other information. You understand that these calls may be generated using automated technology, and that standard message and data rates may apply.
Your consent to receive automated calls is not a condition of any purchase or service. By checking the consent box on our contact form or by calling our firm, you agree to these Terms and Conditions and provide your written consent to receive these communications. You may opt out of these communications at any time by replying STOP to any text message or by contacting us at [insert contact information].
State-Specific Compliance
EO complies with all federal and state laws regarding automated calls and telemarketing practices. Certain states have additional restrictions on the use of automated dialing systems and pre-recorded messages. The following states have more restrictive regulations:
If you are a resident of one of these states, EO will obtain your prior express written consent before making any automated calls or sending pre-recorded messages to you.
By submitting a form inquiry or calling our firm, you agree to us contacting you, and your checking the box when submitting your form inquiry serves as written consent.
Information and Legal Disclaimer
The information contained in this website is for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice. Testimonials and case results contained in this website are for demonstrative purposes only, and do not constitute a guarantee of any particular outcome in a specific case.
By requesting a free consultation with Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC, you agree to the following:
The law differs in every jurisdiction, and you should not rely on any opinion except that of an attorney you have retained, who has a professional duty to advise you after being fully informed of all the pertinent facts, and who is licensed in the applicable state, and is familiar with the applicable law. Internet subscribers, mobile application users, and online readers should seek professional counsel about their legal rights and remedies. You should not act or refrain from acting on the basis of any information found on the Site. Any actions or decisions about your legal rights should be based on the particular facts and circumstances of your situation, and appropriate legal advice from an attorney retained directly by you. EO EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL LIABILITY WITH RESPECT TO ACTIONS TAKEN OR NOT TAKEN BASED UPON ANY INFORMATION OR OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS SITE. Viewing the Site, or communicating with EO by Internet e-mail or through the Site does not constitute or create an attorney-client relationship with anyone. The content and features on the Site do not create, and are not intended to create, an attorney-client relationship, and shall not be construed as legal advice. The content and features of the Site, including means to submit a question or information, do not constitute an offer to represent you or otherwise give rise to an attorney/client relationship.
THE SITE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”. EO MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, REGARDING THE SITE AND ONLINE SERVICES AND HEREBY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND OR NATURE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, ACCURACY, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, EO DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT THE ONLINE SERVICES OR PRODUCTS WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS, OR WILL BE ERROR-FREE, UNINTERRUPTED, OR FREE OF VIRUSES OR OTHER HARMFUL COMPONENTS, OR THAT ANY DEFECTS WILL BE CORRECTED.
Accounts
To use some features of the Site, you may be required to create an account. In connection therewith, you agree to provide and maintain true, accurate, current, and complete information about yourself. You are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of the information you hold for your account login, including your password, and for all Submissions made from your account. You agree to notify us immediately of any unauthorized use of your login. EO may suspend access to your account if it suspects illegal or improper use, or for other reasons, such as for account management purposes, at its sole discretion.
Confidentiality is Not Guaranteed
Information sent to Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC. via Internet e-mail or through the Site is not secure and is done on a non-confidential basis. EO may make reasonable efforts to keep communications private, but because of the nature of Internet communications and the absence of an attorney/client relationship, we cannot promise or guarantee confidentiality.
DISCLAIMER – This Site Does Not Provide Medical Diagnosis or Advice
The content provided on the Site, such as documents, text, graphics, images, videos, news alerts, pharmaceutical drug recalls, prescription medication history, or information on litigation concerning the foregoing topics, or other materials, is for informational purposes only. The information is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always consult a physician for diagnosis and treatment of any medical condition or for any questions you may have regarding a health concern. Never disregard professional medical advice, alter a prescription plan in any way, or delay or refrain from seeking medical advice because of something you have read or seen on the Site. Links to other sites are provided for information only. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not constitute endorsement by EO.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Site may present information about pharmaceutical drug recalls, which is for information purposes only. Such information is not necessarily the most current information on the subject and may or may not be updated based on the last information concerning such recalls. Do not make any decisions regarding medication or medical providers based on information from the Site, including but not limited to information we provide about drug recalls.
EO Is Not Responsible for Content; Limitation on Liability
EO may periodically change, remove, or add the material on the Site without notice. This material may contain technical or typographical errors. EO DOES NOT GUARANTEE ITS ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS OR SUITABILITY. EO assumes no liability or responsibility for any errors or omissions in the contents of the Site. Your use of the Site is at your own risk. Under no circumstances shall EO or any other party involved in the creation, production, or delivery of the Site be liable to you or any other person for any indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages of any kind arising from your access to, or use of, the Site. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW IN NO EVENT SHALL EO BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES RELATING TO THIS MATERIAL, FOR ANY USE OF THIS WEBSITE, OR FOR ANY OTHER LINKED WEBSITE.
Third-party Web Sites
The Site contains links to third-party websites for the convenience of our users. EO does not endorse any of these third-party sites and does not imply any association between EO and those sites. EO does not control these third-party websites and cannot represent that their policies and practices will be consistent with these Terms of Use. If you use links to access and use such websites, you do so at your own risk. EO is not responsible for the contents or availability of any linked sites. These links are provided only as a convenience to the recipient. These Terms only apply to the Site and do not apply to any linked sites. We encourage you to read and understand the terms of use of any linked sites that you visit. Links do not imply that we sponsor, endorse, are affiliated with or associated with, or are legally authorized to use any trademark, trade name, service mark, design, logo, symbol, or other copyrighted materials displayed on or accessible through any linked site.
EO Clients
Only individuals who have entered into a mutually signed retainer agreement with EO are EO clients (“EO Clients”).
Legal and Ethical Requirements
EO has tried to comply with all legal and ethical requirements in compiling the Site. We welcome comments about our compliance with the applicable rules and will update the Site as warranted, upon learning of any new or different requirements.
Ethen Ostroff Law reserves the right to refer or sell leads that come through any of Ethen Ostroff Law’s marketing.
Ethen Ostroff Law also may sell leads on certain campaigns generated in association with third party marketing companies.
Governing Laws in Case of Dispute; Jurisdiction
These Terms of Use shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Pennsylvania, USA, without regard to any choice of law principles. Any and all disputes arising hereunder shall be governed as set forth in the Arbitration section below.
Submissions
You are solely responsible for any information, content, or material you transmit to or through the Site (“Submissions”). You understand that Submissions are considered non-confidential and non-proprietary. Furthermore, you grant EO an unrestricted, irrevocable, perpetual, transferable, sublicensable, worldwide, royalty-free license to use, copy, reproduce, display, publish, publicly perform, transmit, and distribute any Submission, without compensation or accounting to you or anyone else. You represent and warrant that: (a) you have the right to submit the Submission to EO and grant the licenses as described above; (b) EO will not need to obtain licenses from any third party or pay royalties to any third party for its use of the Submission; (c) the Submission does not infringe any third party’s rights, including intellectual property rights and privacy rights; and (d) the Submission complies with these Terms of Use and all applicable laws and regulations.
EO takes no responsibility and assumes no liability for any Submission.
Arbitration
Any and all claims by you arising out of or related to the Site or your use thereof may be resolved only through a binding arbitration proceeding to be conducted under the auspices of the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Both your agreement to arbitrate all controversies, disputes and claims, and the results and awards rendered through the arbitration, will be final and binding on you and may be specifically enforced by legal proceedings. Arbitration will be the sole means of resolving such controversies, disputes and claims, and you waive your rights to resolve such controversies, disputes and claims by court proceedings or any other means. You agree that judgment may be entered on the award in any court of competent jurisdiction and, therefore, any award rendered shall be binding. The arbitrator may not consolidate more than one person’s claims, and may not otherwise preside over any form of a representative or class proceeding. You understand that by agreeing to arbitration as a mechanism to resolve all controversies, disputes and claims between us, you are waiving certain rights, including the right to bring an action in court, the right to a jury trial, the right to broad discovery, and the right to an appeal. You understand that in the context of arbitration, a case is decided by an arbitrator (one or more), not by a judge or a jury.
International Use
The Site is controlled, operated, and administered by EO from offices within the United States of America and is only intended for use therein. We make no representation regarding use of the Site outside of the United States.
Other Terms
If, for any reason, our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, or any portion thereof to be unenforceable, such provision shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give the intended effect thereof, and the remainder of these Terms of Use and Privacy Policy shall continue in full force and effect. EO’s failure to act with respect to a breach by you or others does not waive our right to act with respect to that breach or subsequent or similar breaches. No consent or waiver by EO hereof will be deemed effective unless in writing. These Terms of Use, together with our Privacy Policy, as each is currently posted, constitute the entire agreement between EO and you with respect to your use of the Site and supersede all previous written or oral agreements relating to the subject matter hereof, that this agreement shall not supersede, restrict, or replace any agreements governing the attorney-client relationship between EO and EO Clients.
EO may, in its sole discretion and without prior notice, block and/or terminate your access to the Site and if we determine that you have violated these Terms of Use or other terms or agreements or that may be associated therewith or if you use the Site in a way that we deem, in our sole discretion, to be an unacceptable use.
