The HexClad $2.5M settlement, from the court record

Last reviewed July 2026.

HexClad settled for $2.5 million in February 2025, with preliminary court approval on April 22, 2025, over marketing that called its PTFE-coated hybrid pans “PFAS-free”. Every factual statement below is cited; allegations are worded as allegations, and a settlement is not an admission of wrongdoing.

The case

Cliburn, et al. v. One Source to Market LLC d/b/a HexClad Cookware Inc., Case No. 23STCV28390, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. The complaint alleged that HexClad's hybrid cookware was marketed as "non-toxic", "PFAS-free" and "safe for metal utensils" while its nonstick layer contained PTFE — which is, by chemical definition, a PFAS (case coverage).

The settlement

• Amount: $2.5 million, announced February 2025; preliminary court approval April 22, 2025 (settlement summary).
• Class period: U.S. purchases between February 1, 2022 and March 31, 2024.
• Conduct change: HexClad agreed to stop using phrases like "PFAS-free" on PTFE-coated products.
• What it is not: a settlement generally involves no admission of liability, and none was made here. The dollar figure, the class period and the agreed marketing change are the record; guilt is not part of it.

Why this case matters beyond one brand

It is the cleanest public demonstration of the label gap we track: "PFOA-free" is not "PFAS-free", and "non-toxic" is not a regulated term. The claims at issue weren't fringe — they were the standard vocabulary of premium nonstick marketing, on one of the most heavily advertised pans in America. What made them actionable was chemistry: PTFE is a PFAS, so "PFAS-free" on a PTFE pan is not a matter of opinion.

Where HexClad stands now

HexClad's post-2024 TerraBond ceramic line claims to be PTFE- and PFAS-free. Press coverage reports clean Light Labs results for it, but HexClad does not publish the report and describes the coating composition as proprietary — so in our HexClad row the legacy line is contradicted (by the record above) and TerraBond is unverified (reported clean, nothing published). If HexClad publishes the report, the row changes — the source wins.

The pattern to watch anywhere

The same unverified claim-set ("non-toxic, PFAS/PTFE-free", no published testing) appears today on plenty of other cookware listings — see the unverified tier of our table. We record no evidence those claims are false. We record that, as with HexClad before the docket filled, there is currently nothing published to check them against.

Common questions

How much did HexClad settle for?
$2.5 million, announced February 2025, with preliminary court approval on April 22, 2025. The class period covers US purchases between February 1, 2022 and March 31, 2024, and HexClad agreed to stop using phrases like “PFAS-free” on PTFE-coated products.

What was the HexClad lawsuit about?
Cliburn, et al. v. One Source to Market LLC d/b/a HexClad Cookware Inc., Case No. 23STCV28390, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. The complaint alleged that HexClad's hybrid cookware was marketed as “non-toxic”, “PFAS-free” and “safe for metal utensils” while its nonstick layer contained PTFE — which is, by chemical definition, a PFAS.

Did HexClad admit wrongdoing?
No. A settlement generally involves no admission of liability, and none was made here. The dollar figure, the class period and the agreed marketing change are the record; guilt is not part of it.

Is HexClad PFAS-free now?
HexClad's post-2024 TerraBond ceramic line claims to be PTFE- and PFAS-free. Press coverage reports clean Light Labs results for it, but HexClad does not publish the report and describes the coating composition as proprietary. On our record the legacy line is contradicted and TerraBond is unverified — reported clean, nothing published. If HexClad publishes the report, the row changes.

See every brand's claims against its published proof →

We do not test cookware — we index published third-party results and public records, with attribution, and make no health claims. Court records are public documents; nothing here alleges wrongdoing beyond what the cited record states.