
The claim deadline passed on March 9, 2026. New claims for this settlement are no longer being accepted.
The court approved the settlement on May 13, 2026. Payments are sent once that approval is final: after the time for anyone to appeal it runs out, or after any appeal ends.
Then the payments go out. The settlement administrator, the firm the court appointed to process claims, sends payments to eligible claimants once it has reviewed the claims. How long that takes varies from one settlement to the next.
Filed this claim with Chimo? The status of your claim is on the claims page in your account.


Juan Huertas and four other plaintiffs sued Bayer and the other defendants in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey in 2021, saying that certain Lotrimin® and Tinactin® antifungal spray products (recalled in October 2021) contained benzene and were sold without adequate disclosure. The defendants deny all of the claims, and the court did not decide who was right. This Bayer Antifungals (Lotrimin and Tinactin) case is Huertas et al. v. Aeropres Corp., et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-20021-SRC-CF.
The named plaintiffs (settlement class representatives) include Juan Huertas, Eva Mistretta, Mike Poovey, Darrell Stewart, and Jeremy Wyant. The Bayer Antifungals (Lotrimin and Tinactin) lawsuit details include legal claims such as breach of express and implied warranties, fraud, unjust enrichment, negligent misrepresentation, and state consumer-protection claims.
The case began in 2021 (based on the filing year in the docket number) and reached a settlement after a September 5, 2025, mediation, with the settlement agreement executed December 8, 2025. Settlement class counsel includes attorneys from Silver Golub & Teitell LLP, Bursor & Fisher, P.A., and Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP.
The latest Bayer Antifungals (Lotrimin and Tinactin) settlement update confirms a $4,850,000 non-reversionary cash fund resolving claims that certain recalled Lotrimin® and Tinactin® spray products contained benzene and were sold without adequate disclosure. The Bayer Antifungals (Lotrimin and Tinactin) lawsuit settlement amount will be used to pay valid claims, attorneys’ fees, notice, and administration costs.
The settlement amount was negotiated at a full-day, in-person mediation on September 5, 2025, before retired Judge Diane M. Welsh of JAMS, where the parties reached an agreement in principle.
Under the settlement, consumers who purchased covered antifungal spray products beginning November 16, 2015, could qualify. Bayer Antifungals (Lotrimin and Tinactin) settlement eligibility includes U.S. purchasers of specific recalled aerosol sprays distributed between September 2018 and September 2021. The claim deadline was March 11, 2026, and new claims can no longer be filed.
If you’re asking how much could I get from the Bayer Antifungals (Lotrimin and Tinactin) lawsuit, the answer depends on proof and claim volume. The Bayer Antifungals (Lotrimin and Tinactin) settlement amount per person works like this:
Either amount could be raised or reduced pro rata, depending on how many valid claims were made against the $4,850,000 settlement fund, and payments are reduced by anything the household already received through Bayer’s recall program. Claimants chose one type of claim, not both, and only one claim form per household could be approved.
The Bayer Antifungals (Lotrimin and Tinactin) settlement payout date follows final court approval (a final approval hearing was scheduled for May 13, 2026) and resolution of any appeals. Payments are made to eligible claimants after the settlement becomes final and claims are validated.
This settlement applies to anyone in the United States who purchased a Bayer product beginning no earlier than November 16, 2015. A “Bayer product” is any of the Lotrimin and Tinactin spray products listed below, used to treat athlete’s foot, ringworm, and other fungal infections, that were subject to Bayer’s October 2021 recall (specifically, all Lotrimin and Tinactin spray products with lot numbers beginning with TN, CV, or NAA, distributed between September 2018 and September 2021):
• Lotrimin® Anti-Fungal (AF) Athlete’s Foot Powder Spray
• Lotrimin® Anti-Fungal Jock Itch (AFJI) Athlete’s Foot Powder Spray
• Lotrimin® Anti-Fungal (AF) Athlete’s Foot Deodorant Powder Spray
• Lotrimin® AF Athlete’s Foot Liquid Spray
• Lotrimin® AF Athlete’s Foot Daily Prevention Deodorant Powder Spray
• Tinactin® Jock Itch (JI) Powder Spray
• Tinactin® Athlete’s Foot Deodorant Powder Spray
• Tinactin® Athlete’s Foot Powder Spray
• Tinactin® Athlete’s Foot Liquid Spray
To make a proof-of-purchase claim, claimants had to provide a receipt clearly reflecting 1) the purchase date, 2) the specific Bayer product purchased, and 3) the price of the product. The purchase date had to reflect that they purchased a product covered by Bayer’s October 2021 recall (which includes products purchased from September 2018 to October 2021). A barcode or photograph of the product was not sufficient proof of purchase.
Bayer’s recall notice said benzene is not an ingredient in its products. The lawsuit says its presence appears to be the result of contamination or a flaw in the manufacturing process, and that the products were sold without adequate disclosure. The defendants deny these claims.
Yes. Certain Lotrimin® and Tinactin® aerosol sprays were recalled in October 2021 after testing detected benzene in specific lots.
No. This settlement focuses on purchase-based claims, not personal injury. Claimants only needed to show (or certify) that they purchased eligible products.
The case covers specific recalled spray products, not creams or loose powders. The powder sprays and liquid sprays on the list are included; other products are not.
Any settlement payment is reduced by what your household received through Bayer’s recall program, but not below $0. A household that already received three recall payments could still be eligible for one no-proof payment by attesting to additional purchases.
The settlement agreement allows only one approved claim form per household, which prevents duplicate submissions from the same address and keeps the $4.85M fund for valid claims.
These are the court's own records for this case. They are hosted here unchanged, so you can check anything on this page against the documents themselves.
The full case file is on the court docket: view the docket.