Healthy Babies Bright Futures publishes testing that draws increased public attention to arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury detected in foods marketed to babies and toddlers.

A U.S. House Subcommittee releases a major staff report examining toxic heavy metals in commercial baby foods. The report cites internal testing and company information involving several major manufacturers and retailers.

Congressional investigators publish a follow-up report, increasing scrutiny of testing, manufacturing practices, disclosure, and federal standards for baby food.

Families begin filing individual lawsuits alleging that consumption of certain baby foods containing heavy metals contributed to autism and other neurodevelopmental conditions.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralizes federal Toxic Baby Food lawsuits as In re: Baby Food Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3101, in the Northern District of California. The MDL coordinates common pretrial issues while preserving the individual nature of each plaintiff's claim.

The FDA issues final guidance setting action levels for lead in certain processed foods intended for babies and young children.

The federal MDL grows substantially. JPML data show 88 pending actions in January, 156 by May, and 225 by October.

The federal court conducts extensive expert hearings addressing a central question in the litigation: whether plaintiffs' scientific experts can reliably establish general causation between the alleged baby-food heavy-metal exposures and ASD or ADHD.

The U.S. Supreme Court decides Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist. The case arose from allegations involving heavy metals in baby food. The Supreme Court vacated a prior federal judgment against Hain because the federal court lacked proper diversity jurisdiction after Whole Foods was erroneously dismissed from the lawsuit. The Supreme Court's ruling concerns federal jurisdiction and procedure, not a determination that baby food causes autism or other developmental disorders.

In MDL 3101, the federal court excludes most of the plaintiffs' proposed general-causation expert testimony after applying federal expert-evidence standards. The ruling represents an important challenge for plaintiffs attempting to establish that the alleged exposures are capable of causing ASD or ADHD.

The court pauses much of the MDL while the parties address the consequences of the expert rulings and determine how the litigation should proceed.

Despite those developments, MDL 3101 remains active. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation reports 478 pending cases and 494 total historical actions in the proceeding.