Ziploc Lawsuit: Plastic Environmental Claims & ‘Recyclable’ Advertising

What the Ziploc Lawsuit Claims

SC Johnson markets Ziploc products with recyclability claims including the chasing arrows recycling symbol and statements indicating the products can be recycled. The class action lawsuit, filed in federal court in California, alleges these representations are materially deceptive because Ziploc bags are made from flexible plastic film (polyethylene), which is not accepted in most curbside recycling programs across the United States.

While flexible plastics can theoretically be recycled at specific drop-off locations (typically retail store bins), the lawsuit argues that consumers reading a recyclable label on a product reasonably understand it to mean the product can be placed in their curbside bin -- the primary recycling mechanism available to most Americans. By placing recycling symbols and recyclability claims on products that the average consumer cannot practically recycle, SC Johnson is alleged to have engaged in deceptive "greenwashing" in violation of California's Unfair Competition Law and the FTC's Green Guides.

Green Guides and the Greenwashing Problem

The FTC's Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims, commonly called the Green Guides, set standards for when companies can make environmental claims in advertising. The Green Guides specifically address recyclability: a product should not be marketed as recyclable unless it can be collected, separated, and reprocessed by recycling programs available to a substantial majority of consumers.

Plaintiffs argue that because fewer than 50% of US consumers have practical access to drop-off recycling programs that accept flexible plastic film, Ziploc's recyclability claims fail the Green Guides standard. The FTC updated its Green Guides in 2012 and is in the process of revising them again, with greenwashing enforcement as a stated priority. California has gone further: AB 1201 and related legislation impose strict legal requirements on plastic recycling claims in that state.

Similar greenwashing litigation has targeted other consumer packaged goods companies including Keep (trash bags), and has resulted in both FTC enforcement actions and private class action settlements. Related: Brita false performance claims lawsuit.

Who Qualifies for the Ziploc Lawsuit

The proposed class includes consumers who purchased Ziploc plastic bags or containers in California (and potentially other states) within the last four years and who allege they were influenced by the recyclability representations. Consumers who consider environmental impact in their purchasing decisions -- a growing and documented segment of the consumer market -- may be able to allege they paid a premium for Ziploc over competing non-recyclability-claiming products.

Documentation of purchase is not strictly required in most consumer protection class actions; class members can often certify purchases by affidavit. However, keeping receipts, loyalty card records, or bank/credit card statements that show Ziploc purchases is helpful.

SC Johnson's Position

SC Johnson has publicly committed to sustainability goals including increasing recyclable or reusable packaging. The company argues that its recyclability claims are accurate in the sense that the materials are technically recyclable and that it actively promotes store drop-off programs as the recycling pathway for its products. SC Johnson points to its participation in the How2Recycle program, which provides standardized recyclability labeling, as evidence of good-faith environmental disclosure.

The legal question is whether these qualified recyclability claims, in context, create a misleading overall impression for the average consumer. Courts in prior greenwashing cases have found that technical accuracy does not insulate a company from consumer protection liability if the net impression conveyed to ordinary consumers is materially different from the qualified reality.

Case Status 2026

The Ziploc greenwashing litigation is in active proceedings in California federal court. Class certification briefing is ongoing. Given the FTC's renewed focus on greenwashing enforcement and California's aggressive consumer protection litigation environment, this case is closely watched by consumer packaged goods companies across the industry. A ruling on class certification is expected in 2026 or early 2027.

How to Get Legal Help

If you believe you qualify based on the eligibility criteria described above, the next step is a free consultation with an experienced attorney. Most plaintiff-side attorneys handling these cases work on contingency -- meaning you pay nothing unless your case results in a recovery. Bring any relevant documentation including receipts, correspondence, or evidence of the harm you experienced.

To stay current on case developments, claim deadlines, and settlement news, bookmark this page and subscribe to LawsuitWatch alerts. Coverage is updated as new court filings, settlement announcements, and eligibility changes are made public.