ST. LOUIS — Carboline Global has filed a federal lawsuit against the Sherwin-Williams Company, alleging false advertising under the Lanham Act.
The complaint centers on Sherwin-Williams’ marketing of its FIRETEX FX9502 intumescent coating, which Carboline claims was sold nationwide based on misleading and unsafe performance data, according to the Sept. 2 case filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.
From 2021 through 2024, Sherwin-Williams promoted FX9502 as a breakthrough product that could deliver the same life-saving fire protection as competing intumescent coatings while requiring significantly less material, labor, and cost.
The company marketed the product with what it described as third-party testing data from Intertek showing that thinner applications of FX9502 could achieve two-hour fire resistance ratings for structural steel. The reduced thickness, Sherwin-Williams claimed, would allow contractors to save time, labor and money.
Carboline alleges these claims were false and that the Intertek test data Sherwin-Williams relied on was incorrect.
The complaint alleges that the required thickness for FX9502 in the most common applications was actually more than double the amount that Sherwin-Williams advertised, leaving buildings across the United States at risk of insufficient fire protection.
Carboline further contends that Sherwin-Williams knew, or should have known, that the data was flawed but marketed the product aggressively to secure contracts.
Founded in 1947, Carboline has long been a leader in performance coatings and was a top seller of intumescent products with its Thermo-Lag E100 before FX9502 entered the market.
The company explains that intumescent coatings are crucial in modern construction, designed to expand when exposed to extreme heat to create an insulating barrier around steel, wood or other materials.
Properly applied at the correct thickness, these coatings can buy valuable time during fires, protecting structures from collapse and allowing occupants to escape.
Carboline claims that Sherwin-Williams’ false representations about FX9502’s required thickness created an unfair advantage, causing Carboline to lose contracts and hundreds of millions in sales.
The lawsuit states that longtime customers were persuaded by Sherwin-Williams’ promises of cost savings and efficiency, which turned out to be based on inaccurate data.
In 2024, Intertek released a corrected report that more than doubled the required thickness for FX9502 in common applications, including restrained steel beams requiring two-hour fire ratings.
For those applications, the thickness requirements increased by 102 to 163% compared to Sherwin-Williams’ earlier claims.
Carboline points to these corrections as proof that FX9502 was no more efficient than other coatings and that Sherwin-Williams’ marketing advantage collapsed once accurate data came to light.
The lawsuit notes the risks to public safety are severe, arguing that buildings across the country coated with FX9502 do not meet proper fire safety standards and may require immediate recoating.
It also states that Sherwin-Williams’ conduct not only harmed competitors but delayed construction projects and, more critically, endangered the lives of building occupants.
Carboline notes that in the highly regulated and safety-driven market for fireproofing products, accuracy about thickness requirements is essential and if coatings are applied too thin, they may fail during a fire, leading to potential building collapse.
The company argues that Sherwin-Williams should have verified the suspiciously low test results internally before marketing FX9502, particularly given that its predecessor product, FX9500, required significantly thicker applications, according to the suit.
Carboline is seeking compensatory damages. It is represented by Cathleen Aubuchon and Charles Eblen of Shook, Hardy & Bacon; and John C. Hueston and Sourabh Mishra of Hieston Hennigan.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri case number: 4:25-cv-01315
