Loss Contingency, Claims Settled, Number

[Table of Contents](#i769337f517694ce29a72abc52f207787_10)  
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)Becton, Dickinson and Company  
  
During the course of engaging in settlement discussions with plaintiffs’ law firms, the Company has learned, and may in future periods learn, additional information regarding these and other unfiled claims, or other lawsuits, which could materially impact the Company’s estimate of the number of claims or lawsuits against the Company.Filter Product ClaimsAs of September 30, 2021, the Company is defending approximately 275 product liability claims involving the Company’s line of inferior vena cava (“IVC”) filters (collectively, the “Filter Product Claims”). The majority of those claims were previously pending in an MDL in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, but those MDL claims either have been, or are in the process of being, remanded to various federal jurisdictions. Filter Product Claims are also pending in various state court jurisdictions, including a coordinated proceeding in Arizona State Court. In addition, those claims include putative class actions filed in the United States and Canada. The Filter Product Claims generally seek damages for personal injury allegedly resulting from use of the products. The Company has limited information regarding the nature and quantity of certain of the Filter Product Claims. The Company continues to receive claims and lawsuits and may in future periods learn additional information regarding other unfiled or unknown claims, or other lawsuits, which could materially impact the Company’s estimate of the number of claims or lawsuits against the Company. On May 31, 2019, the MDL Court ceased accepting direct filings or transfers into the Filter Product Claims MDL and, as noted above, remands for non-settled cases have begun. Federal and state court trials are scheduled over the next 12 months. As of September 30, 2021, the Company entered into settlement agreements and/or settlement agreements in principle for approximately 9,505 cases.In most product liability litigations (like those described above), plaintiffs allege a wide variety of claims, ranging from allegations of serious injury caused by the products to efforts to obtain compensation notwithstanding the absence of any injury. In many of these cases, the Company has not yet received and reviewed complete information regarding the plaintiffs and their medical conditions and, consequently, is unable to fully evaluate the claims. The Company expects that it will receive and review additional information regarding any remaining unsettled product liability matters.Other Legal MattersThe Company is a potentially responsible party to a number of federal administrative proceedings in the United States brought under the Comprehensive Environment Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also known as “Superfund,” and similar state laws. The affected sites are in varying stages of development. In some instances, the remedy has been completed, while in others, environmental studies are underway or commencing. For several sites, there are other potentially responsible parties that may be jointly or severally liable to pay all or part of cleanup costs. While it is not feasible to predict the outcome of these proceedings, based upon the Company’s experience, current information and applicable law, the Company does not expect these proceedings to have a material adverse effect on its financial condition and/or liquidity.On February 27, 2020, a putative class action captioned Kabak v. Becton, Dickinson and Company, et al., Civ. No. 2:20-cv-02155 (SRC) (CLW), now captioned Industriens Pensionsforsikring v. Becton, Dickinson and Company, et al., was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against the Company and certain of its officers. The complaint, which purports to be brought on behalf of all persons (other than defendants) who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company's common stock from November 5, 2019 through February 5, 2020, asserts claims for purported violations of Sections 10 and 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and seeks, among other things, damages and costs. The complaint alleges that defendants concealed material information regarding AlarisTM infusion pumps, including that (1) certain pumps exhibited software errors, (2) the Company was investing in remediation efforts as opposed to other enhancements and (3) the Company was thus reasonably likely to recall certain pumps and/or experience regulatory delays. These alleged omissions, the complaint asserts, rendered certain public statements about the Company’s business, operations and prospects false or misleading, causing investors to purchase stock at an inflated price. The plaintiff filed a second amended complaint to add certain additional factual allegations on February 3, 2021, which the Company 69
