Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies	Contingencies Given the uncertain nature of litigation generally, the Company is not able, in all cases, to estimate the amount or range of loss that could result from an unfavorable outcome of the litigation to which the Company is a party. In accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, the Company establishes accruals to the extent probable future losses are estimable (in the case of environmental matters, without considering possible third-party recoveries). With respect to putative class action lawsuits in the United States and certain of the Canadian lawsuits described below relating to product liability matters, the Company is unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses for the following reasons: (i) all or certain of the proceedings are in early stages; (ii) the Company has not received and reviewed complete information regarding all or certain of the plaintiffs and their medical conditions; and/or (iii) there are significant factual issues to be resolved. In addition, there is uncertainty as to the likelihood of a class being certified or the ultimate size of the class. With respect to the investigative subpoena issued by the Department of Defense Inspector General and the Department of Health and Human Services and the civil investigative demand served by the Department of Justice, as discussed below, the Company is unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses for the following reasons: (i) all or certain of the proceedings are in early stages; and/or (ii) there are significant factual and legal issues to be resolved. In view of the uncertainties discussed below, the Company could incur charges in excess of any currently established accruals and, to the extent available, liability insurance. In the opinion of management, any such future charges, individually or in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and consolidated cash flows. Product Liability Matters As is further discussed in Note 8, the Company completed its acquisition of C.R. Bard, Inc. ("Bard") on December 29, 2017 and the following matters include Bard-related legal proceedings and claims that the Company assumed on the acquisition date. The Company believes that some settlements and judgments, as well as some legal defense costs, relating to product liability matters are or may be covered in whole or in part under its product liability insurance policies with a limited number of insurance carriers, or, in some circumstances, indemnification obligations to the Company from other parties, which if disputed, the Company intends to vigorously contest. Amounts recovered under the Company’s product liability insurance policies or indemnification arrangements may be less than the stated coverage limits or less than otherwise expected and may not be adequate to cover damages and/or costs relating to claims. In addition, there is no guarantee that insurers or other parties will pay claims or that coverage or indemnity will be otherwise available. Hernia Product Claims As of March 31, 2018, the Company is defending approximately 1,280 product liability claims involving Bard’s line of hernia repair devices (collectively, the “Hernia Product Claims”). The majority of those claims are currently pending in a coordinated proceeding in Rhode Island State Court, but claims are also pending in other state and/or federal court jurisdictions. In addition, those claims include multiple putative class actions in Canada. Generally, the Hernia Product Claims seek damages for personal injury allegedly resulting from use of the products. From time to time, the Company engages in resolution discussions with plaintiffs’ law firms regarding certain of the Hernia Product Claims, but the Company also intends to vigorously defend Hernia Product Claims that do not settle, including through litigation. Trials are scheduled throughout 2018 in various state and federal courts. The Company expects additional trials of Hernia Product Claims to take place over the next 12 months. On April 11, 2018, plaintiffs’ attorneys filed a request for the creation of a new hernia multi-district litigation (“MDL”) in either the Southern District of Ohio or the Western District of Missouri. The Company cannot give any assurances that the resolution of the Hernia Product Claims that have not settled, including asserted and unasserted claims and the putative class action lawsuits, will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, financial condition and/or liquidity. Women’s Health Product Claims As of March 31, 2018, the Company is defending approximately 3,195 product liability claims involving Bard’s line of pelvic mesh devices. The majority of those claims are currently pending in a federal MDL in the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, but claims are also pending in other state and/or federal court jurisdictions, including a coordinated proceeding in New Jersey State Court. In addition, those claims include putative class actions filed in the United States. Not included in the figures above are approximately 1,080 filed and unfiled claims that have been asserted or threatened against Bard but lack sufficient information to determine whether a Bard pelvic mesh device is actually at issue. The claims identified above also include products manufactured by both Bard and two subsidiaries of Medtronic plc (as successor in interest to Covidien plc) (“Medtronic”), each a supplier of Bard. Medtronic has an obligation to defend and indemnify Bard with respect to any product defect liability relating to products its subsidiaries had manufactured. As described below, in July 2015 the Company reached an agreement with Medtronic (which was amended in June 2017) regarding certain aspects of Medtronic’s indemnification obligation. The foregoing lawsuits, unfiled claims, putative class actions, and other claims, together with claims that have settled or are the subject of agreements or agreements in principle to settle, are referred to collectively as the “Women’s Health Product Claims.” The Women’s Health Product Claims generally seek damages for personal injury allegedly resulting from use of the products. As of March 31, 2018, the Company has reached agreements or agreements in principle with various plaintiffs’ law firms to settle their respective inventories of cases totaling approximately 13,658 of the Women’s Health Product Claims. The Company believes that these Women’s Health Product Claims are not the subject of Medtronic’s indemnification obligation. These settlement agreements and agreements in principle include unfiled and previously unknown claims held by various plaintiffs’ law firms, which are not included in the approximate number of lawsuits set forth in the first paragraph of this section. Each agreement is subject to certain conditions, including requirements for participation in the proposed settlements by a certain minimum number of plaintiffs. The Company continues to engage in discussions with other plaintiffs’ law firms regarding potential resolution of unsettled Women’s Health Product Claims, which may include additional inventory settlements. Starting in 2014 in the MDL, the court entered certain pre-trial orders requiring trial work up and remand of a significant number of Women’s Health Product Claims, including an order entered in the MDL on January 30, 2018, that requires the work up and remand of all remaining unsettled cases (the “WHP Pre-Trial Orders”). The WHP Pre-Trial Orders may result in material additional costs or trial verdicts in future periods in defending Women’s Health Product Claims. Trials are scheduled throughout 2018 in state courts. A trial in the New Jersey coordinated proceeding began in March 2018, and in April 2018 a jury entered a verdict against the Company in the total amount of $68 million ($33 million compensatory; $35 million punitive). The Company intends to challenge that verdict. The Company expects additional trials of Women’s Health Product Claims to take place over the next 12 months. In July 2015, as part of the agreement with Medtronic noted above, Medtronic agreed to take responsibility for pursuing settlement of certain of the Women’s Health Product Claims that relate to products distributed by Bard under supply agreements with Medtronic, and Bard has paid Medtronic $121 million towards these potential settlements. In June 2017, Bard amended the agreement with Medtronic to transfer responsibility for settlement of additional Women’s Health Product Claims to Medtronic on terms similar to the July 2015 agreement, including with respect to the obligation to make payments to Medtronic towards these potential settlements. Bard also may, in its sole discretion, transfer responsibility for settlement of additional Women’s Health Product Claims to Medtronic on similar terms. The agreements do not resolve the dispute between Bard and Medtronic with respect to Women’s Health Product Claims that do not settle, if any. During the course of engaging in settlement discussions with plaintiffs’ law firms, the Company has learned, and may in future periods learn, additional information regarding these and other unfiled claims, or other lawsuits, which could materially impact the Company’s estimate of the number of claims or lawsuits against the Company. Filter Product Claims In connection with the acquisition of Bard, as of March 31, 2018, the Company is defending approximately 3,789 product liability claims involving Bard’s line of inferior vena cava filters (collectively, the “Filter Product Claims”). The majority of those claims are currently pending in an MDL in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, but claims are also pending in other state and/or federal court jurisdictions, including a coordinated proceeding in Arizona State Court. In addition, those claims include putative class actions filed in the United States and Canada. The Filter Product Claims generally seek damages for personal injury allegedly resulting from use of the products. The Company has limited information regarding the nature and quantity of certain of the Filter Product Claims. The Company continues to receive claims and lawsuits and may in future periods learn additional information regarding other unfiled or unknown claims, or other lawsuits, which could materially impact the Company’s estimate of the number of claims or lawsuits against the Company. Trials are scheduled throughout 2018 in the MDL and state courts. On March 30, 2018, a jury in the first MDL trial found the Company liable for negligent failure to warn and entered a verdict in favor of plaintiffs. The jury found the Company was not liable for (a) strict liability design defect; (b) strict liability failure to warn; and (c) negligent design. The Company intends to challenge that verdict. The Company expects additional trials of Filter Product Claims may take place over the next 12 months. In most product liability litigations (like those described above), plaintiffs allege a wide variety of claims, ranging from allegations of serious injury caused by the products to efforts to obtain compensation notwithstanding the absence of any injury. In many of these cases, the Company has not yet received and reviewed complete information regarding the plaintiffs and their medical conditions and, consequently, is unable to fully evaluate the claims. The Company expects that it will receive and review additional information regarding any remaining unsettled product liability matters. In January 2017, the Company reached an agreement to resolve litigation filed in the Southern District of New York by its insurance carriers in connection with Women’s Health Product Claims and Filter Product Claims. The agreement requires the insurance carriers to reimburse the Company for certain future costs incurred in connection with Filter Product Claims up to an agreed amount. For certain product liability claims or lawsuits, the Company does not maintain or has limited remaining insurance coverage. Other Legal Matters In June 2007, Retractable Technologies, Inc. (“RTI”) filed a complaint against the Company under the caption Retractable Technologies, Inc. vs. Becton Dickinson and Company (Civil Action No. 2:07-cv-250, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas) alleging that the BD Integra™ syringes infringe patents licensed exclusively to RTI. Included in its complaint, RTI also alleged that the Company engaged in false advertising with respect to certain of the Company’s safety-engineered products in violation of the Lanham Act; acted to exclude RTI from various product markets and to maintain its market share through, among other things, exclusionary contracts in violation of state and federal antitrust laws; and engaged in unfair competition. In January 2008, the Court severed the patent and non-patent claims into separate cases. BD paid a $5 million award following an adverse infringement verdict at the district court and the Company's unsuccessful appeal. On September 19, 2013, a jury returned a verdict against BD with respect to RTI’s Lanham Act claim and claim for attempted monopolization based on deception in the safety syringe market. The jury awarded RTI $113.5 million for its attempted monopolization claim (which would be trebled under the antitrust statute). Upon issuance of a Court of Appeals decision reversing the attempted monopolization claim, the Company recorded a $336 million reversal of reserves associated with the initial judgment, in Other operating (income) expense, net, in the first quarter of fiscal year 2017. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment for Lanham Act liability, and remanded the case to the district court to consider whether and if so how much profit should be disgorged by BD on that claim. The Court of Appeals also vacated and remanded the injunction ordered by the district court. On January 31, 2017, RTI filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. On March 20, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari, and the district court thereafter heard RTI’s request for disgorgement. On August 17, 2017, the district court entered judgment in favor of BD and ruled that RTI is not entitled to any award of money damages. RTI has appealed this ruling to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Since early 2013, the Bard has received subpoenas or Civil Investigative Demands from a number of State Attorneys General seeking information related to the sales and marketing of certain of the Company’s products that are the subject of the Hernia Product Claims and the Women’s Health Product Claims. The Company is cooperating with these requests. Although the Company has had and continues to have discussions with the State Attorneys General with respect to overall potential resolution of this matter, there can be no assurance that a resolution will be reached or what the terms of any such resolution may be. In November 2015, the Department of Defense Inspector General issued an investigative subpoena to Bard. The Department of Health and Human Services is also participating in this investigation. The subpoena seeks documents related to the Company’s sales and marketing of certain filter products, drug coated balloon catheters, and peripheral arterial disease detection products. In July 2017, a separate civil investigative demand was served by the Department of Justice seeking documents and information relating to an investigation into possible violations of the False Claims Act in connection with the sales and marketing of FloChec^® and QuantaFlo^TM devices. The Company is cooperating with these requests. Since it is not feasible to predict the outcome of these matters, the Company cannot give any assurances that the resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, financial condition and/or liquidity. The Company is a potentially responsible party to a number of federal administrative proceedings in the United States brought under the Comprehensive Environment Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also known as “Superfund,” and similar state laws. The affected sites are in varying stages of development. In some instances, the remedy has been completed, while in others, environmental studies are underway or commencing. For several sites, there are other potentially responsible parties that may be jointly or severally liable to pay all or part of cleanup costs. While it is not feasible to predict the outcome of these proceedings, based upon the Company’s experience, current information and applicable law, the Company does not expect these proceedings to have a material adverse effect on its financial condition and/or liquidity. However, one or more of the proceedings could be material to the Company’s business and/or results of operations. The Company is also involved both as a plaintiff and a defendant in other legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses to these suits pending against the Company and is engaged in a vigorous defense of each of these matters. Litigation Reserves Accruals for Bard-related product liability, legal defense costs and other legal matters amounted to approximately $1.8 billion at March 31, 2018. Such amounts include provisional estimates which have been recorded with respect to the acquired liabilities. These amounts may be adjusted upon the availability of new or additional information regarding facts or circumstances which existed at the acquisition date. As of March 31, 2018, the Company has $165 million in Bard-related qualified settlement funds (“QSFs”), subject to certain settlement conditions, for certain product liability matters. Payments to QSFs are recorded as a component of Restricted cash. The Company's expected recoveries related to Bard-related product liability matters were approximately $303 million at March 31, 2018. A substantial amount of these expected recoveries at March 31, 2018 relate to the Company’s agreements with Medtronic related to certain Women’s Health Product Claims. The terms of the Company’s agreements with Medtronic are substantially consistent with the assumptions underlying, and the manner in which, the Company has recorded expected recoveries related to the indemnification obligation. The expected recoveries at March 31, 2018 related to the indemnification obligation are not in dispute with respect to claims that Medtronic settles pursuant to the agreements. As described above, the agreements do not resolve the dispute between the Company and Medtronic with respect to Women’s Health Product Claims that do not settle, if any, and the Company also may, in its sole discretion, transfer responsibility for settlement of additional Women’s Health Product Claims to Medtronic on similar terms.

Contingencies

Given the uncertain nature of litigation generally, the Company is not able, in all cases, to estimate the amount or range of loss that could result from an unfavorable outcome of the litigation to which the Company is a party. In accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, the Company establishes accruals to the extent probable future losses are estimable (in the case of environmental matters, without considering possible third-party recoveries). With respect to putative class action lawsuits in the United States and certain of the Canadian lawsuits described below relating to product liability matters, the Company is unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses for the following reasons: (i) all or certain of the proceedings are in early stages; (ii) the Company has not received and reviewed complete information regarding all or certain of the plaintiffs and their medical conditions; and/or (iii) there are significant factual issues to be resolved. In addition, there is uncertainty as to the likelihood of a class being certified or the ultimate size of the class. With respect to the investigative subpoena issued by the Department of Defense Inspector General and the Department of Health and Human Services and the civil investigative demand served by the Department of Justice, as discussed below, the Company is unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses for the following reasons: (i) all or certain of the proceedings are in early stages; and/or (ii) there are significant factual and legal issues to be resolved.

In view of the uncertainties discussed below, the Company could incur charges in excess of any currently established accruals and, to the extent available, liability insurance. In the opinion of management, any such future charges, individually or in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and consolidated cash flows.

Product Liability Matters

As is further discussed in Note 8, the Company completed its acquisition of C.R. Bard, Inc. ("Bard") on December 29, 2017 and the following matters include Bard-related legal proceedings and claims that the Company assumed on the acquisition date. The Company believes that some settlements and judgments, as well as some legal defense costs, relating to product liability matters are or may be covered in whole or in part under its product liability insurance policies with a limited number of insurance carriers, or, in some circumstances, indemnification obligations to the Company from other parties, which if disputed, the Company intends to vigorously contest. Amounts recovered under the Company’s product liability insurance policies or indemnification arrangements may be less than the stated coverage limits or less than otherwise expected and may not be adequate to cover damages and/or costs relating to claims. In addition, there is no guarantee that insurers or other parties will pay claims or that coverage or indemnity will be otherwise available.

Hernia Product Claims

As of March 31, 2018, the Company is defending approximately 1,280 product liability claims involving Bard’s line of hernia repair devices (collectively, the “Hernia Product Claims”). The majority of those claims are currently pending in a coordinated proceeding in Rhode Island State Court, but claims are also pending in other state and/or federal court jurisdictions. In addition, those claims include multiple putative class actions in Canada. Generally, the Hernia Product Claims seek damages for personal injury allegedly resulting from use of the products. From time to time, the Company engages in resolution discussions with plaintiffs’ law firms regarding certain of the Hernia Product Claims, but the Company also intends to vigorously defend Hernia Product Claims that do not settle, including through litigation. Trials are scheduled throughout 2018 in various state and federal courts. The Company expects additional trials of Hernia Product Claims to take place over the next 12 months. On April 11, 2018, plaintiffs’ attorneys filed a request for the creation of a new hernia multi-district litigation (“MDL”) in either the Southern District of Ohio or the Western District of Missouri. The Company cannot give any assurances that the resolution of the Hernia Product Claims that have not settled, including asserted and unasserted claims and the putative class action lawsuits, will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, financial condition and/or liquidity.

Women’s Health Product Claims

As of March 31, 2018, the Company is defending approximately 3,195 product liability claims involving Bard’s line of pelvic mesh devices. The majority of those claims are currently pending in a federal MDL in the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, but claims are also pending in other state and/or federal court jurisdictions, including a coordinated proceeding in New Jersey State Court. In addition, those claims include putative class actions filed in the United States. Not included in the figures above are approximately 1,080 filed and unfiled claims that have been asserted or threatened against Bard but lack sufficient information to determine whether a Bard pelvic mesh device is actually at issue. The claims identified above also include products manufactured by both Bard and two subsidiaries of Medtronic plc (as successor in interest to Covidien plc) (“Medtronic”), each a supplier of Bard. Medtronic has an obligation to defend and indemnify Bard with respect to any product defect liability relating to products its subsidiaries had manufactured. As described below, in July 2015 the Company reached an agreement with Medtronic (which was amended in June 2017) regarding certain aspects of Medtronic’s indemnification obligation. The foregoing lawsuits, unfiled claims, putative class actions, and other claims, together with claims that have settled or are the subject of agreements or agreements in principle to settle, are referred to collectively as the “Women’s Health Product Claims.” The Women’s Health Product Claims generally seek damages for personal injury allegedly resulting from use of the products.

As of March 31, 2018, the Company has reached agreements or agreements in principle with various plaintiffs’ law firms to settle their respective inventories of cases totaling approximately 13,658 of the Women’s Health Product Claims. The Company believes that these Women’s Health Product Claims are not the subject of Medtronic’s indemnification obligation. These settlement agreements and agreements in principle include unfiled and previously unknown claims held by various plaintiffs’ law firms, which are not included in the approximate number of lawsuits set forth in the first paragraph of this section. Each agreement is subject to certain conditions, including requirements for participation in the proposed settlements by a certain minimum number of plaintiffs. The Company continues to engage in discussions with other plaintiffs’ law firms regarding potential resolution of unsettled Women’s Health Product Claims, which may include additional inventory settlements.

Starting in 2014 in the MDL, the court entered certain pre-trial orders requiring trial work up and remand of a significant number of Women’s Health Product Claims, including an order entered in the MDL on January 30, 2018, that requires the work up and remand of all remaining unsettled cases (the “WHP Pre-Trial Orders”). The WHP Pre-Trial Orders may result in material additional costs or trial verdicts in future periods in defending Women’s Health Product Claims. Trials are scheduled throughout 2018 in state courts. A trial in the New Jersey coordinated proceeding began in March 2018, and in April 2018 a jury entered a verdict against the Company in the total amount of $68 million ($33 million compensatory; $35 million punitive). The Company intends to challenge that verdict. The Company expects additional trials of Women’s Health Product Claims to take place over the next 12 months.

In July 2015, as part of the agreement with Medtronic noted above, Medtronic agreed to take responsibility for pursuing settlement of certain of the Women’s Health Product Claims that relate to products distributed by Bard under supply agreements with Medtronic, and Bard has paid Medtronic $121 million towards these potential settlements. In June 2017, Bard amended the agreement with Medtronic to transfer responsibility for settlement of additional Women’s Health Product Claims to Medtronic on terms similar to the July 2015 agreement, including with respect to the obligation to make payments to Medtronic towards these potential settlements. Bard also may, in its sole discretion, transfer responsibility for settlement of additional Women’s Health Product Claims to Medtronic on similar terms. The agreements do not resolve the dispute between Bard and Medtronic with respect to Women’s Health Product Claims that do not settle, if any.

During the course of engaging in settlement discussions with plaintiffs’ law firms, the Company has learned, and may in future periods learn, additional information regarding these and other unfiled claims, or other lawsuits, which could materially impact the Company’s estimate of the number of claims or lawsuits against the Company.

Filter Product Claims

In connection with the acquisition of Bard, as of March 31, 2018, the Company is defending approximately 3,789 product liability claims involving Bard’s line of inferior vena cava filters (collectively, the “Filter Product Claims”). The majority of those claims are currently pending in an MDL in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, but claims are also pending in other state and/or federal court jurisdictions, including a coordinated proceeding in Arizona State Court. In addition, those claims include putative class actions filed in the United States and Canada. The Filter Product Claims generally seek damages for personal injury allegedly resulting from use of the products. The Company has limited information regarding the nature and quantity of certain of the Filter Product Claims. The Company continues to receive claims and lawsuits and may in future periods learn additional information regarding other unfiled or unknown claims, or other lawsuits, which could materially impact the Company’s estimate of the number of claims or lawsuits against the Company. Trials are scheduled throughout 2018 in the MDL and state courts. On March 30, 2018, a jury in the first MDL trial found the Company liable for negligent failure to warn and entered a verdict in favor of plaintiffs. The jury found the Company was not liable for (a) strict liability design defect; (b) strict liability failure to warn; and (c) negligent design. The Company intends to challenge that verdict. The Company expects additional trials of Filter Product Claims may take place over the next 12 months.

In most product liability litigations (like those described above), plaintiffs allege a wide variety of claims, ranging from allegations of serious injury caused by the products to efforts to obtain compensation notwithstanding the absence of any injury. In many of these cases, the Company has not yet received and reviewed complete information regarding the plaintiffs and their medical conditions and, consequently, is unable to fully evaluate the claims. The Company expects that it will receive and review additional information regarding any remaining unsettled product liability matters.

In January 2017, the Company reached an agreement to resolve litigation filed in the Southern District of New York by its insurance carriers in connection with Women’s Health Product Claims and Filter Product Claims. The agreement requires the insurance carriers to reimburse the Company for certain future costs incurred in connection with Filter Product Claims up to an agreed amount. For certain product liability claims or lawsuits, the Company does not maintain or has limited remaining insurance coverage.

Other Legal Matters

In June 2007, Retractable Technologies, Inc. (“RTI”) filed a complaint against the Company under the caption Retractable Technologies, Inc. vs. Becton Dickinson and Company (Civil Action No. 2:07-cv-250, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas) alleging that the BD Integra™ syringes infringe patents licensed exclusively to RTI. Included in its complaint, RTI also alleged that the Company engaged in false advertising with respect to certain of the Company’s safety-engineered products in violation of the Lanham Act; acted to exclude RTI from various product markets and to maintain its market share through, among other things, exclusionary contracts in violation of state and federal antitrust laws; and engaged in unfair competition. In January 2008, the Court severed the patent and non-patent claims into separate cases. BD paid a $5 million award following an adverse infringement verdict at the district court and the Company's unsuccessful appeal.

On September 19, 2013, a jury returned a verdict against BD with respect to RTI’s Lanham Act claim and claim for attempted monopolization based on deception in the safety syringe market. The jury awarded RTI $113.5 million for its attempted monopolization claim (which would be trebled under the antitrust statute). Upon issuance of a Court of Appeals decision reversing the attempted monopolization claim, the Company recorded a $336 million reversal of reserves associated with the initial judgment, in Other operating (income) expense, net, in the first quarter of fiscal year 2017. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment for Lanham Act liability, and remanded the case to the district court to consider whether and if so how much profit should be disgorged by BD on that claim. The Court of Appeals also vacated and remanded the injunction ordered by the district court. On January 31, 2017, RTI filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. On March 20, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari, and the district court thereafter heard RTI’s request for disgorgement. On August 17, 2017, the district court entered judgment in favor of BD and ruled that RTI is not entitled to any award of money damages. RTI has appealed this ruling to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Since early 2013, the Bard has received subpoenas or Civil Investigative Demands from a number of State Attorneys General seeking information related to the sales and marketing of certain of the Company’s products that are the subject of the Hernia Product Claims and the Women’s Health Product Claims. The Company is cooperating with these requests. Although the Company has had and continues to have discussions with the State Attorneys General with respect to overall potential resolution of this matter, there can be no assurance that a resolution will be reached or what the terms of any such resolution may be.

In November 2015, the Department of Defense Inspector General issued an investigative subpoena to Bard. The Department of Health and Human Services is also participating in this investigation. The subpoena seeks documents related to the Company’s sales and marketing of certain filter products, drug coated balloon catheters, and peripheral arterial disease detection products. In July 2017, a separate civil investigative demand was served by the Department of Justice seeking documents and information relating to an investigation into possible violations of the False Claims Act in connection with the sales and marketing of FloChec^® and QuantaFlo^TM devices. The Company is cooperating with these requests. Since it is not feasible to predict the outcome of these matters, the Company cannot give any assurances that the resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, financial condition and/or liquidity.

The Company is a potentially responsible party to a number of federal administrative proceedings in the United States brought under the Comprehensive Environment Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also known as “Superfund,” and similar state laws. The affected sites are in varying stages of development. In some instances, the remedy has been completed, while in others, environmental studies are underway or commencing. For several sites, there are other potentially responsible parties that may be jointly or severally liable to pay all or part of cleanup costs. While it is not feasible to predict the outcome of these proceedings, based upon the Company’s experience, current information and applicable law, the Company does not expect these proceedings to have a material adverse effect on its financial condition and/or liquidity. However, one or more of the proceedings could be material to the Company’s business and/or results of operations.

The Company is also involved both as a plaintiff and a defendant in other legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses to these suits pending against the Company and is engaged in a vigorous defense of each of these matters.

Litigation Reserves

Accruals for Bard-related product liability, legal defense costs and other legal matters amounted to approximately $1.8 billion at March 31, 2018. Such amounts include provisional estimates which have been recorded with respect to the acquired liabilities. These amounts may be adjusted upon the availability of new or additional information regarding facts or circumstances which existed at the acquisition date. As of March 31, 2018, the Company has $165 million in Bard-related qualified settlement funds (“QSFs”), subject to certain settlement conditions, for certain product liability matters. Payments to QSFs are recorded as a component of Restricted cash.

The Company's expected recoveries related to Bard-related product liability matters were approximately $303 million at March 31, 2018. A substantial amount of these expected recoveries at March 31, 2018 relate to the Company’s agreements with Medtronic related to certain Women’s Health Product Claims. The terms of the Company’s agreements with Medtronic are substantially consistent with the assumptions underlying, and the manner in which, the Company has recorded expected recoveries related to the indemnification obligation. The expected recoveries at March 31, 2018 related to the indemnification obligation are not in dispute with respect to claims that Medtronic settles pursuant to the agreements. As described above, the agreements do not resolve the dispute between the Company and Medtronic with respect to Women’s Health Product Claims that do not settle, if any, and the Company also may, in its sole discretion, transfer responsibility for settlement of additional Women’s Health Product Claims to Medtronic on similar terms.