Costco Baby Wipes Lawsuit: PFAS Claims, Class, and Microplastics

The Costco baby wipes lawsuit is a proposed class action filed in June 2024 alleging that Kirkland Signature Baby Wipes contain PFAS, the so-called “forever chemicals,” even though Costco markets them as fragrance free, plant-based, and made with naturally derived ingredients. A federal judge in California refused to throw the case out in May 2025, and it is now in discovery. No settlement has been reached, and no trial date is set. A separate pair of lawsuits filed in 2025 targets the same product but on different grounds: microplastics rather than PFAS.

What the PFAS Suit Alleges

Larisa Bullard and Mila Corrigan filed Bullard v. Costco Wholesale Corp. on June 20, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The suit names Costco and Nice-Pak Products, Inc., the New York manufacturer that makes the Kirkland-branded wipes.{¹}

Bullard bought the wipes online from Costco multiple times between January 2022 and February 2024. Corrigan bought a pack through Instacart from a Costco store in New York City. Both say they relied on the packaging language describing the wipes as “fragrance free,” “plant-based,” made with “naturally derived ingredients,” and safe for sensitive skin. Neither would have bought the product, or would have paid the same price, had they known about the alleged contamination.{²}

The plaintiffs say testing at a Department of Defense ELAP-certified laboratory detected 3.7 parts per billion of PFAS in the Kirkland Signature Baby Wipes (Fragrance Free).{¹} After the court asked for more specificity, the amended complaint named three specific PFAS compounds and their concentrations.

The complaint pleads ten causes of action. Under California law, it alleges violations of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, the Unfair Competition Law, and the False Advertising Law. Under New York law, it alleges violations of General Business Law §§ 349 and 350. The common-law counts include fraud, fraudulent concealment, negligent misrepresentation, breach of express warranty, and unjust enrichment. Aggregate claims exceed $5 million, and the plaintiffs have demanded a jury trial.{³}

Consumer Reports separately tested 19 baby wipe products from 18 companies, including Kirkland Signature, and reported no measurable levels of 30 common PFAS compounds using a method sensitive down to 2.3 nanograms per sample.{⁴} That result doesn’t decide the case. Different labs, lot samples, and target compounds can produce different findings, and the scientific question is one of the things discovery is meant to work out.

Where the Case Stands Now

Costco, represented by Arnold & Porter, moved to dismiss.{⁵} The court initially agreed in February 2025, dismissing the original complaint for lack of specificity, with the judge writing that “PFAS” is “not a magic word that can be invoked to open automatically the doors to federal litigation.”{⁶} The plaintiffs then filed an amended complaint identifying three specific compounds and their concentrations.

On May 14, 2025, Chief U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg denied the renewed motion to dismiss. He ruled that the plaintiffs had “sufficiently alleged the presence and quantity of three specific PFAS” and that whether those levels actually pose a health risk was not something to resolve at the pleading stage.{⁷} Judge Seeborg also found the plaintiffs had “established a reasonable inference that the wipes contained PFAS and that this contradicts the marketing language.”{⁸}

Costco has not issued a public statement on the ruling.{} The case is now in discovery, the stage where each side exchanges documents and depositions. Class certification had not been granted as of mid-2025 but was expected to be addressed later in the year.{⁸} No settlement has been announced.{³}

Who Could Be Part of the Class

The complaint proposes a nationwide class of consumers who purchased Kirkland Signature Baby Wipes during the applicable statute of limitations period, with separate subclasses for California and New York buyers. People who bought the wipes for resale are excluded, along with the judges, the defendants, and counsel on both sides.{¹}

Because the court has not yet certified the class, there is nothing to sign up for or claim at this point. If certification is granted later, notice would be sent to eligible purchasers describing how to participate or opt out.

The Separate 2025 Microplastics Lawsuits

Two more lawsuits filed in 2025 target the same Kirkland wipes, but the claim is different: microplastics, not PFAS. The nonprofit GMO/Toxin Free USA sued in D.C. Superior Court on May 23, 2025, under the District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act, asking the court to declare Costco’s “plastic free” and “naturally derived ingredients” marketing deceptive and to order it stopped. The group is not seeking damages or class certification.{⁹}

Plaintiff Ella Rosewood filed a separate class action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York on June 10, 2025, alleging independent testing found microplastics in the wipes. That case, docketed as 1:25-cv-02892, names Costco and Nice-Pak and seeks monetary and punitive damages along with declaratory and equitable relief.{¹⁰}

These microplastics cases are legally distinct from Bullard. They involve a different alleged contaminant, different testing, and different courts. Any outcome in the PFAS suit won’t automatically decide them, and the reverse is also true.{¹¹}

What This Means for Buyers Now

There has been no recall of Kirkland Signature Baby Wipes. There is also no federal ban on PFAS in baby wipes or children’s personal care products.{⁴} The FDA issued a report on PFAS in cosmetics in December 2025 under the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022, but acknowledged “significant data gaps” on dermal absorption and toxicity at real-world use levels.{¹²}

California, where the case is pending, bans intentionally added PFAS in cosmetics under AB 2771 (effective January 2025) and restricts PFAS in certain children’s products under AB 652, among other categories.{¹³} Without a federal threshold that defines how much PFAS in a baby wipe is too much, the core factual questions in Bullard — whether the tested levels are real, what they mean for health, and whether they contradict the “naturally derived” label — will be worked out through discovery, expert reports, and either a settlement or a verdict. If you bought Kirkland Signature Baby Wipes and want to be reached if the class is certified, keep your Costco purchase records; that documentation is what class notices ask for.

1
Classaction.org. Bullard et al v. Costco Wholesale Corp. et al, Complaint
2
PFAS Central. Costco Class Action Alleges Kirkland Fragrance Free Baby Wipes Contain PFAS
3
Top Class Actions. Costco Class Action Alleges Kirkland Fragrance Free Baby Wipes Contain PFAS
4
Consumer Reports. PFAS in Baby Wipes Safety
5
Law360. Costco Fails to Wipe Away Kirkland Baby Wipes PFAS Suit
6
Alston PFAS. Court Denies Bid to Wipe Baby Wipes Class Action
7
Top Class Actions. Costco Class Action Alleges Kirkland Fragrance Free Baby Wipes Contain PFAS
8
Environment + Energy Leader. Costco PFAS Lawsuit Moves Forward as Court Validates Consumer Harm Claims
9
Toxin Free USA. TFUSA v. Kirkland Complaint
10
South Shore Press. Costco and Nice-Pak Face Class Action Lawsuit Over Baby Wipes Marketing
11
Toxin Free USA. Lawsuits Filed Against Costco Wholesale Corporation for Deceptive Marketing of Kirkland Signature Baby Wipes
12
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in Cosmetics
13
California State Assembly. SB-682 Analysis