Prop 65 60-Day Notice Monitor + Settlement Benchmark (California AG)

Search every Proposition 65 60-day notice filed with the California Attorney General, and get the number a Prop 65 notice actually raises: what notices like this one have settled for, and whether the party who filed it is a serial filer.

Search by product, chemical, company (defendant), plaintiff or AG number. Data comes straight from the California Attorney General's own 60-day notice register.

The question this answers

A Prop 65 60-day notice lands on your desk. The register will tell you it exists. It will not tell you the two things you need before you call your lawyer:

1. What is this going to cost? Over resolved comparables, the median Prop 65 settlement runs about $19,500 — of which the median civil penalty is $2,000 and the median attorney fees are $18,000. Attorney fees are a median 90% of the total settlement. (Measured per notice across 2023 H1; this Actor recomputes it live for your cohort, with the sample size attached.)
2. Who is on the other side? A handful of serial filers generate a large share of all notices. This Actor profiles each filer in your results: how many notices they filed, how often, against how many distinct companies, on which chemicals and products — and what their own matters have settled for.

What you get

Three record types per search:

search_summary — notices matched, date range, the distinct noticing parties ranked by volume, and the settlement benchmark for the whole matched cohort: median / mean / min / max / p25 / p75 for total payments, civil penalty, attorney fees and other payments, plus the attorney-fee share of the total and the share of notices that ever acquired published economics.

notice — one record per notice: AG number, filing date, noticing party, plaintiff attorney, alleged violators, chemicals, the product or source, comments, every case event (Complaint / Settlement / Judgment / Withdrawal) with its own figures, court docket numbers, type of claim, relief sought, the injunctive-relief text, and the notice's civil penalty, attorney fees, other payments and total.

filer_profile — per noticing party: notices filed in the window, notices per month, first and latest filing, distinct companies targeted, plaintiff attorneys used, top chemicals, top products, top targets, and that filer's own settlement benchmark.

Input

Pass one search, or a list of them in queries. Every search needs at least one filter:

Field	Matches
defendant	the alleged violator — any company named in the notice
product	the source/product text, e.g. dried figs, vinyl gloves
chemical	an officially listed chemical, e.g. Lead, Diisononyl phthalate (DINP)
plaintiff	the noticing party or its attorney
agNumber	one specific notice, e.g. 2026-03114

{
  "defendant": "Whole Foods",
  "since": "2023-01-01",
  "maxFilersProfiled": 3
}

{
  "queries": [
    { "product": "dried figs" },
    { "chemical": "Lead", "defendant": "Sprouts" },
    { "plaintiff": "Ecological Alliance" }
  ],
  "lookbackYears": 5
}

since / until bound the period (default: the last 3 years, via lookbackYears). Pass recordId on a search and it is echoed onto every record from it, so results join back onto your own list.

Paying only for what you want. Every part of the output can be switched off, and anything switched off is not charged:

Control	Effect
maxNoticesPerQuery	Caps the notice records returned. The benchmark is always computed over every matched notice, so a cap never moves the number you are quoting — it only limits the rows.
includeNoticeRecords: false	Returns just the search summary and the filer profiles. No notice records, no per-record charge.
maxFilersProfiled: 0	Skips serial-filer profiling entirely. No filer profiles, no filer-benchmark charge.

Who this is for

• Companies and in-house counsel that received a notice, or that sell into California and want to know what their product category attracts
• Prop 65 defence firms sizing exposure and checking a filer's track record
• Compliance and product-safety teams monitoring their category or their suppliers
• Insurers and diligence teams pricing Prop 65 exposure in a transaction

Prop 65 Clearinghouse sells subscription access to this same notice and settlement database at $1,150–$1,800/year. That product is a searchable archive; this one computes the answer.

Source, and why the answer is trustworthy

California Office of the Attorney General, Proposition 65 60-Day Notice register — the official filing register, read through the AG's own server-side CSV export rather than by scraping an HTML page. Public, keyless, no login.

The register is not as simple as it looks, and the difference shows up as wrong numbers rather than as errors. Every one of these was measured on 2026-07-30 and is guarded at runtime:

• The export returns at most 1,000 rows and has no pagination. items_per_page and page are silently ignored. Worse, truncation drops the newest rows: a plain search for Walmart returns 1,000 rows ending in May 2022 and silently omits the 843 notices filed since. Read literally, that says a company has been clear for four years. This Actor treats any response at the cap as a hard error and re-reads the period in bisected date windows until every window is provably complete.
• The export ships one row per case event, not per notice. A notice with a Complaint, a Settlement and a Judgment appears three times with the settlement repeated on each. Counting rows overstates a filer's volume by ~25%; averaging money over rows overstates the median settlement by 13%. Everything here is collapsed to the notice first.
• Only ~38% of notices ever acquire published settlement economics, because unresolved notices have nothing to report. So every figure is a benchmark over resolved comparables, labelled with its sample size — never an estimate attached to an open notice.
• A notice can carry conflicting figures where successive settlement records revise the attorney fees. A Judgment supersedes them; where nothing breaks the tie the notice is flagged and excluded from the benchmark rather than guessed at.
• Chemical names contain commas (1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane) and company names hide behind them (Mindful Foods, Inc.), so both are segmented against California's own 800+ listed-chemical vocabulary and a corporate-suffix rule rather than split on punctuation.
• The AG's register reuses an AG number occasionally — 2026-02912 covers two entirely unrelated notices. They are reported separately and flagged, not merged.
• Freshness is checked before any search runs. The newest notice in the whole register is compared to today and the run fails if the register has gone stale, because a stale register turns "no notices found" into a dangerous answer.

Limits — read before you rely on it

• This is not legal advice, and the benchmark is not a prediction for any individual notice. It describes what comparable matters settled for.
• Settlement economics exist only for notices the AG has published outcomes for (~38%). Recent notices are mostly unresolved by construction.
• Company-name segmentation is a heuristic; the unmodified register text is always emitted alongside it as allegedViolatorsRaw and chemicalsRaw.
• Coverage is California Proposition 65 60-day notices only (Health & Safety Code §25249.5 et seq.). It is not a general litigation or CPSC recall search.