Crest, Sensodyne and Parodontax SLS gum toothpaste lawsuits face motions to dismiss

Estimated reading time: 10 minutes.

Key facts

• What happened: Haleon and Procter & Gamble have each asked a federal court in San Diego to dismiss proposed class actions over their gum health toothpastes. Haleon filed its motion on October 6, 2026, and P&G filed on October 7.
• The claim: California shoppers say Crest Pro-Health, Sensodyne and Parodontax toothpastes are marketed to improve gum health but contain sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), a foaming ingredient they describe as a known oral irritant.
• Products named: Eight Crest Pro-Health varieties in the P&G case, and Sensodyne Complete Protection, Sensodyne Sensitivity & Gum and four Parodontax lines in the Haleon case, according to the original complaints.
• Who the cases would cover: People who bought the products in California for personal use since July 2, 2022, as proposed in the original complaints.
• Nothing to claim: There is no settlement, refund or recall. The companies have not been found to have done anything wrong, and SLS is a common toothpaste ingredient.
• The cases: Garland v. Haleon, No. 3:26-cv-03855-GPC-JAC, and Oliver v. The Procter & Gamble Co., No. 3:26-cv-03859-JO-BJW, both in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.

In this article

• What the lawsuits claim
• What SLS is and why it is in toothpaste
• Which toothpastes are named
• Who is suing
• Who the cases would cover and what they seek
• Where the cases stand
• What shoppers can do now
• What remains unclear
• Frequently asked questions

What the lawsuits claim

The two lawsuits were filed on the same day, July 2, 2026, by the same San Diego law firm, Fitzgerald Monroe Flynn PC. They make nearly identical arguments against two of the largest toothpaste makers in the United States.

The Procter & Gamble Co. is an Ohio-based consumer goods company that makes Crest. The second case was first filed against Haleon US, Inc., the U.S. arm of Haleon plc, a British consumer health company that makes Sensodyne and Parodontax. An amended complaint filed on August 3, 2026, names Haleon US Holdings, LLC as the defendant.

Both complaints say the companies market these toothpastes as improving gum health and treating gingivitis. Gingivitis is inflammation of the gums, usually caused by plaque buildup, and it can lead to more serious gum disease if untreated.

The complaints claim those gum health messages are misleading because the toothpastes contain SLS. In the plaintiffs' words, SLS is "a harsh detergent and known irritant that, at the levels present in the Products, can damage gum and mouth tissue, inhibit wound healing, trigger inflammation, cause allergic and contact-sensitivity reactions and epithelial sloughing, and disrupt the oral microbiome." Epithelial sloughing means the peeling of the thin outer layer of tissue inside the mouth.

The complaints say these are "the very conditions" the companies claim their products prevent or reduce. The core argument is that a toothpaste sold for unhealthy or sensitive gums should not contain an ingredient the plaintiffs say can irritate gums, or should at least warn buyers about it.

The complaints also say the companies had alternatives. They name several gentler foaming agents studied for toothpaste, including cocamidopropyl betaine and Poloxamer 407. And they point to competing products marketed as SLS-free, including a Colgate Total gum product and brands such as Biotène, Burt's Bees, Hello and Squigle, as evidence that shoppers care about the ingredient.

These are allegations. Both companies have moved to dismiss the cases, and no court has ruled on whether SLS harms gums at the levels in these products.

What SLS is and why it is in toothpaste

Sodium lauryl sulfate is a surfactant, an ingredient that lowers the surface tension of water so it can spread, clean and foam. It is what makes many toothpastes lather.

The complaints themselves note that SLS "has been a standard surfactant in toothpastes since the 1970s" and that most commercially available toothpastes contain from 0.5% to 2.0% SLS. They do not say what concentration the named products contain. They estimate it is "likely" about 1% to 1.5%, "based on literature regarding commercially available toothpastes."

To support their claim that SLS can harm the mouth, the complaints cite published dental studies on canker sores, tissue peeling, slower healing and allergic reactions. Those studies are the plaintiffs' selection. The companies have not yet had a chance to present opposing evidence, and a court has not weighed the science.

On the product labels, SLS appears in the small-print list of inactive ingredients on the Drug Facts panel. Fluoride toothpastes are regulated as over-the-counter drugs, which is why they carry that panel. The complaints argue that most shoppers do not read the inactive ingredients and would not know what SLS is.

This is not a safety recall No regulator has recalled these toothpastes or ordered a change to their labels. The lawsuits challenge how the products are marketed. If you have gum pain, sores or irritation, talk with a dentist about your symptoms and the products you use.

Which toothpastes are named

The original complaints list these products. They say the lists include "at least" these varieties, so the final scope could differ.

The complaints quote label claims that the plaintiffs say they relied on. On Crest Pro-Health Gum Detoxify Plus, those include "CLINICALLY PROVEN HEALTHIER GUMS IN 1 WEEK" and "CLINICALLY PROVEN TO FORTIFY GUMS." On Parodontax Active Gum Repair, they include "CLINICALLY PROVEN TO HELP REVERSE SIGNS OF EARLY GUM DISEASE" and "Improves gum health."

The complaints argue that these claims, and the overall gum health message of the labels, are misleading because the products contain SLS.

Who is suing

In the Haleon case:

• Chelsea Garland of San Diego County says she bought Sensodyne Sensitivity & Gum.
• Jordan Nelson says she bought Parodontax Active Gum Repair from about 2022 to early 2026, often at stores in Pleasant Hill, California.
• Karen Cisneros says she bought Parodontax Complete Protection Whitening and Parodontax Active Gum Repair from about 2020 to 2024, often at stores in Long Beach. The complaint says she noticed gum irritation over time, and that after she stopped using Parodontax, the symptoms gradually improved and had significantly lessened by 2025.

In the P&G case:

• Sherrie Oliver says she bought Crest Pro-Health Gum Detoxify Plus from about 2023 to late 2025, often at Walmart stores in Moreno Valley and Riverside. The complaint says she experienced pain, discomfort and sensitivity in her teeth and gums after using it for an extended period.
• Michael Testone says he bought Crest Pro-Health Gum Detoxify Plus from about 2018 to February 2026, at Target in San Diego and online.

Each plaintiff says they were not familiar with SLS, did not notice it in the ingredient list, and would not have bought the product had they known about its effects.

Who the cases would cover and what they seek

Each original complaint proposes a class of people who bought the named products in California for personal or household use, from four years before the filing date (July 2, 2022) until notice is given to the class. The cases do not propose a nationwide class.

Both complaints bring the same five claims:

1. Violation of California's Unfair Competition Law
2. Violation of California's False Advertising Law
3. Violation of California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act
4. Breach of express warranty, meaning a promise made on the label
5. Breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, a legal promise that a product is fit for its ordinary purpose

They ask the court to order the companies to destroy the challenged advertising and labels and to recall the products. They also seek disgorgement of profits, restitution, compensatory, statutory and punitive damages, and attorneys' fees. The complaints say more than $5 million is at stake, the threshold for this kind of class action in federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act, but give no specific total.

Where the cases stand

The two cases are separate and have different judges.

Haleon case. U.S. District Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel and Magistrate Judge Janet A. Cabral are assigned. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on August 3, 2026, naming Haleon US Holdings, LLC. After agreed extensions, Haleon filed a motion to dismiss on October 6, 2026. The court issued an order setting a briefing schedule on October 13.

P&G case. U.S. District Judge Jinsook Ohta and Magistrate Judge Brian J. White are assigned. P&G first moved to dismiss on September 8, 2026. The plaintiffs then filed an amended complaint on September 28, which generally replaces the earlier version. P&G filed a new motion to dismiss on October 7, along with a request for judicial notice, which asks the court to consider outside documents such as product labels.

A motion to dismiss argues that a complaint fails legally even if its factual claims are true. The text of the motions, the amended complaints and the briefing orders was not available in the public court records we checked as of October 21, 2026. That means we cannot report the companies' specific arguments, or exactly how the amended complaints changed the product lists or claims.

We found no public statement from Haleon or P&G about the lawsuits.

Keep your receipts if you buy these products If the cases later settle, class members may be asked for proof of purchase or a sworn statement. Saving receipts or online order history for these toothpastes costs nothing and can help if a claim process ever opens.

What shoppers can do now

If you bought one of these toothpastes in California. You do not need to do anything now. No class has been certified. If one is, or if the cases settle, class members would normally receive formal notice of their options.

If you live outside California. The proposed classes in the original complaints are limited to California purchasers.

If you want to avoid SLS. Check the inactive ingredients on the Drug Facts panel, where it is listed as sodium lauryl sulfate. Some toothpastes are labeled SLS-free. A dentist can help choose a product for sensitive or irritated gums.

If you want a case you can act on now. See our list of class action cases you can join.

Beware of fake toothpaste settlement offers There is no Crest, Sensodyne or Parodontax SLS settlement. Messages promising a payout in exchange for your personal or bank details are not connected to these cases.

What remains unclear

• What the amended complaints say. Both cases now proceed on amended complaints that were not publicly available to us. They may add or drop products, plaintiffs or claims.
• The companies' defenses. Neither motion to dismiss was available in the records we checked.
• How much SLS the products contain. The complaints estimate a range from published studies of toothpastes generally. They do not report testing the named products.
• The science at these levels. The plaintiffs cite studies linking SLS to oral irritation. Whether those findings apply to the named products, at the amounts used, is a disputed question the court has not addressed.
• Timing. We could not confirm hearing dates for either motion.

This article is for information only and is not legal or medical advice. Anyone with oral health concerns should consult a dentist, and anyone with legal questions should contact a licensed attorney.

Frequently asked questions

Which toothpastes are in the SLS lawsuits?

The original complaints name eight Crest Pro-Health gum varieties, Sensodyne Complete Protection, Sensodyne Sensitivity & Gum, and Parodontax Complete Protection, Active Gum Repair, Daily Gum Care and Gum Strengthen & Protect. Amended complaints were later filed and may have changed the list.

Is sodium lauryl sulfate in toothpaste dangerous?

The plaintiffs say SLS can irritate gums and mouth tissue and cite dental studies. SLS has been used in toothpaste since the 1970s and remains common. No court or regulator has found these products unsafe, and the companies are contesting the claims.

Has Crest, Sensodyne or Parodontax been recalled?

No. We found no recall connected to these lawsuits. The cases challenge marketing claims, not product contamination.

Can I join the toothpaste class action?

The proposed classes cover people who bought the named products in California for personal use since July 2, 2022. There is no claim form or settlement. If a class is certified or a settlement is approved, class members would receive notice.

What did Haleon and P&G say?

Both companies filed motions to dismiss in October 2026. The text of those motions was not publicly available to us, and we found no public statement from either company about the lawsuits.

What happens next?

The plaintiffs will oppose the motions, the companies will reply, and each judge will decide whether the case can continue. If a case survives, it would move to evidence exchange and, later, a request for class certification.