Litigation and Related Matters	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2018
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Litigation and Related Matters	NOTE 17. LITIGATION AND RELATED MATTERS ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS Environmental Compliance Our manufacturing and research facilities are affected by various federal, state and local requirements relating to the discharge of materials and the protection of the environment. We make expenditures necessary for compliance with applicable environmental requirements at each of our operating facilities. These regulatory requirements continually change, therefore we cannot predict with certainty future expenditures associated with compliance with environmental requirements. Environmental Sites Summary We are actively involved in the investigation, closure and/or remediation of existing or potential environmental contamination under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) and state Superfund and similar environmental laws at several domestically owned, formerly owned and non-owned locations allegedly resulting from past industrial activity. In a few cases, we are one of several potentially responsible parties and have agreed to jointly fund the required investigation and remediation, while preserving our defenses to the liability. We may also have rights of contribution or reimbursement from other parties or coverage under applicable insurance policies. We are currently pursuing coverage and recoveries under those policies with respect to certain of the sites, including the St. Helens, OR site, the Macon, GA site and the Elizabeth City, NC site, each of which is summarized below. These efforts include two active and independent litigation matters against legacy primary and excess policy insurance carriers for recovery of fees and costs incurred by us in connection with our investigation and remediation activities for such sites. Other than disclosed below, we are unable to predict the outcome of these matters or the timing of any recoveries, whether through settlement or otherwise. We are also unable to predict the extent to which any recoveries might cover our final share of investigation and remediation costs for these sites. Our final share of investigation and remediation costs may exceed any such recoveries, and such amounts net of insurance recoveries may be material. In 2017, we entered into settlement agreements totaling $30.5 million with certain legacy insurance carriers to resolve ongoing litigation and recover fees and costs previously incurred by us in connection with certain environmental sites. All of these cash settlements have been released to us from escrow, including $28.7 million received in the first six months of 2018. We anticipate that we may enter into additional settlement agreements in the future which may or may not be material, with other legacy insurers to obtain reimbursement or contribution for environmental site expenses. Estimates of our future liability at the environmental sites are based on evaluations of currently available facts regarding each individual site. We consider factors such as our activities associated with the site, existing technology, presently enacted laws and regulations and prior company experience in remediating contaminated sites. Although current law imposes joint and several liability on all parties at Superfund sites, our contribution to the remediation of these sites is expected to be limited by the number of other companies potentially liable for site remediation. As a result, our estimated liability reflects only our expected share. In determining the probability of contribution, we consider the solvency of other parties, the site activities of other parties, whether liability is being disputed, the terms of any existing agreements and experience with similar matters, and the effect of our October 2006 Chapter 11 reorganization upon the validity of the claim, if any. Specific Material Events St Helens, OR In August 2010, we entered into a Consent Order (the “Consent Order”) with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (“ODEQ”), along with Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc. (“Kaiser”), and Owens Corning Sales LLC (“OC”), with respect to our St. Helens, OR facility, which was previously owned by Kaiser and then OC. The Consent Order required that we and Kaiser complete a remedial investigation and feasibility study (“RI/FS”) on the portion of the site owned by us (“Owned Property”), which is comprised of Upland and Lowland areas. The Consent Order further required us, Kaiser and OC to conduct an RI/FS in the In-Water area of the adjacent Scappoose Bay. Costs and responsibilities for investigation, including the current RI/FS, for the Owned Property have been shared with Kaiser pursuant to a cost sharing agreement with Kaiser. Costs and responsibilities for the investigation with respect to the in-water areas that we do not own have been shared with Kaiser and OC pursuant to a cost sharing agreement with Kaiser and OC. On September 14, 2016, the parties submitted a Feasibility Study to the ODEQ proposing remedial action options for the Upland area. We have participated in the investigation phase for the Lowland area of the Owned Property and the Scappoose Bay and worked with the ODEQ, Kaiser and OC to finalize the reports to move to the Feasibility Study phase. On September 30, 2016, Kaiser filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina (Case No. 16-31602) (the ”Bankruptcy Court”). AWI, OC and the ODEQ have all been included on the master list of potential creditors filed with the Bankruptcy Court for notice purposes. By order dated October 14, 2016, the Bankruptcy Court formed a statutory committee of unsecured creditors, to which we were appointed to serve, along with OC and The Boeing Company. The Committee is charged with, among other things, maximizing recovery of all unsecured creditor claims, including claims of Kaiser and ODEQ. Noticed parties submitted claims to the Bankruptcy Court on September 13, 2017. The Chapter 11 case impacts Kaiser’s ongoing participation in the RI/FS process, as well as the ODEQ consent order and cost sharing agreements. In November 2017, we participated in voluntary mediation with ODEQ, OC and Kaiser to negotiate a resolution that would discharge Potentially Responsible Parties (“PRPs”) liability for the site. As a result of the mediation, on February 1, 2018, ODEQ issued a Public Notice and a proposed Consent Judgment recommending that, in exchange for a release from ODEQ for all contamination claims against AWI, we would pay $8.6 million to the State of Oregon and perform a previously scoped remedial action for the Upland area of the site. During the fourth quarter of 2017, we increased our reserve for environmental liabilities by $8.6 million as a result of this pending settlement with the State of Oregon. The public comment period has closed and ODEQ published its response to the comments received. On April 5, 2018, ODEQ issued Public Notice of the Remedial Action for the Upland Area and has since responded to public comments. The Consent Judgment remains subject to entry and approval by the Columbia County Circuit Court, which we expect to occur in 2018. On June 26, 2018 ODEQ published its Record of Decision confirming the selected remedial action required for the Upland Area. AWI will be responsible for performing the remedial action upon ODEQ’s filing of the Consent Judgment with the court, pending appeal. Kaiser has asserted that the Consent Judgement violates the stay imposed by its bankruptcy case. We believe Kaiser’s assertions are without merit. A hearing on the applicability of the stay to the Consent Judgment is scheduled with the Bankruptcy Court on July 31, 2018. Macon, GA The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) has listed two landfills located on a portion of our building products facility in Macon, GA, along with the former Macon Naval Ordnance Plant landfill adjacent to our property, portions of Rocky Creek, and certain tributaries leading to Rocky Creek (collectively, the “Macon Site”) as a Superfund site on the National Priorities List due to the presence of contaminants, most notably polychlorinated biphenyls (“PCBs”). In September 2010, we entered into an Administrative Order on Consent for a Removal Action with the EPA to investigate PCB contamination in one of the landfills on our property, the Wastewater Treatment Plant Landfill (the “WWTP Landfill,” also known as “Operable Unit 1”). After completing an investigation of the WWTP Landfill and submitting our final Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis. EPA issued an Action Memorandum in July 2013 selecting our recommended remedy for the Removal Action. The Operable Unit 1 response action for the WWTP Landfill is complete and the final report was submitted to the EPA on October 11, 2016. The EPA approved the final report on November 28, 2016, and a Post-Removal Control Plan (the “Plan”) was submitted to the EPA on March 28, 2017. That Plan will monitor the effectiveness of the WWTP Landfill response action and our estimate of future liabilities includes these tasks. It is probable that we will incur field investigation, engineering and oversight costs associated with a RI/FS with respect to the remainder of the Superfund site, which includes the other landfill on our property, as well as areas on and adjacent to AWI’s property and Rocky Creek (the “Remaining Site,” also known as “Operable Unit 2”). On September 25, 2015, AWI and other PRPs received a Special Notice Letter from the EPA under CERCLA inviting AWI and the PRPs to enter into the negotiation of a Settlement Agreement (formerly known as an Administrative Order on Consent) to conduct an RI/FS of Operable Unit 2. We, along with the other PRPs, submitted a good faith offer to the EPA in response to the Special Notice Letter to conduct RI/FS and are currently negotiating a final agreement with EPA. We have not yet commenced an investigation of this portion of the site. We anticipate that the EPA will require significant investigative work for Operable Unit 2 and that we may ultimately incur costs in remediating any contamination discovered during the RI/FS. The current estimate of future liability at this site includes only our estimated share of the costs of the investigative work that, at this time, we anticipate the EPA will require the PRPs to perform. We are unable to reasonably estimate AWI’s final share of the costs or the total costs associated with the investigation work or any resulting remediation therefrom, although such amounts may be material. Elizabeth City, NC This site is a former cabinet manufacturing facility that was operated by Triangle Pacific Corporation, now known as Armstrong Wood Products, Inc. (“Triangle Pacific”), from 1977 until 1996. The site was formerly owned by the U.S. Navy (“Navy”) and Westinghouse, now CBS Corporation (“CBS”). We assumed ownership of the site when we acquired the stock of Triangle Pacific in 1998. Prior to our acquisition, the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources listed the site as a hazardous waste site. In 1997, Triangle Pacific entered into a cost sharing agreement with Westinghouse whereby the parties agreed to share equally in costs associated with investigation and potential remediation. In 2000, Triangle Pacific and CBS entered into an Administrative Order on Consent to conduct an RI/FS with the EPA for the site. In 2007, we and CBS entered into an agreement with the Navy whereby the Navy agreed to pay one third of defined past and future investigative costs up to a certain amount, which has now been exhausted. The EPA approved the RI/FS work plan in August 2011. In January 2014, we submitted the draft Remedial Investigation and Risk Assessment reports and conducted supplemental investigative work based upon agency comments to those reports. The EPA published an Interim Action Proposed Plan for the site in April 2018 seeking public comment through June 7, 2018. EPA is now evaluating comments, including ours, as we work toward a Record Of Decision in 2018. If remediation is required, the related costs may be material, although we expect these costs to be shared with CBS and the Navy. Summary of Financial Position Liabilities of $13.1 million as of June 30, 2018 and $13.5 million as of December 31, 2017 were recorded for environmental liabilities that we consider probable and for which a reasonable estimate of the probable liability could be made. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2018, we did not record any additional reserves for potential environmental liabilities. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2017, we recorded reserves for potential environmental liabilities of $0.7 million and $1.3 million, respectively. Where existing data is sufficient to estimate the liability, that estimate has been used; where only a range of probable liabilities is available and no amount within that range is more likely than any other, the lower end of the range has been used. As assessments and remediation activities progress at each site, these liabilities are reviewed to reflect new information as it becomes available, and adjusted to reflect amounts actually incurred and paid. These liabilities are undiscounted. The estimated liabilities above do not take into account any claims for recoveries from insurance or third parties. It is our policy to record insurance recoveries when probable. For insurance recoveries that are reimbursements of prior environmental expenditures, the income statement impact is recorded within cost of goods sold, SG&A expenses and/or discontinued operations, which are the same income statement categories where environmental expenditures were historically recorded. Insurance recoveries in excess of historical environmental spending, are recorded on the balance sheet as a part of other long-term liabilities and released as future environmental spending occurs or the liability is settled. The estimated liabilities above do not take into account any claims for recoveries from insurance or third parties. It is our policy to record recoveries as assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Actual costs to be incurred at identified sites may vary from our estimates. Based on our knowledge of the identified sites, it is not possible to reasonably estimate future costs in excess of amounts already recognized. OTHER CLAIMS On September 8, 2017, Roxul USA, Inc. (d/b/a Rockfon) filed litigation against us in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware alleging anticompetitive conduct seeking remedial measures and unspecified damages. Roxul USA, Inc. is a significant ceilings systems competitor with global headquarters in Europe and expanding operations in the Americas. We believe the allegations are without merit and intend to vigorously defend the matter. During the first quarter of 2018, the Court denied, in part, and granted, in part, our motion to dismiss, dismissing two of the claims brought by Roxul. The litigation is currently ongoing. We are involved in other various lawsuits, claims, investigations and other legal matters from time to time that arise in the ordinary course of business, including matters involving our products, intellectual property, relationships with suppliers, relationships with distributors, relationships with competitors, employees and other matters. From time to time, for example, we may be a party to litigation matters that involve product liability, tort liability and other claims under various allegations, including illness due to exposure to certain chemicals used in the workplace; or medical conditions arising from exposure to product ingredients or the presence of trace contaminants. Such allegations may involve multiple defendants and relate to legacy products that we and other defendants purportedly manufactured or sold. We believe that any current claims are without merit and intend to defend them vigorously. For these matters, we also may have rights of contribution or reimbursement from other parties or coverage under applicable insurance policies. When applicable and appropriate, we will pursue coverage and recoveries under those policies, but are unable to predict the outcome of those demands. While complete assurance cannot be given to the outcome of these proceedings, we do not believe that any current claims, individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity or results of operations.

NOTE 17. LITIGATION AND RELATED MATTERS

ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

Environmental Compliance

Our manufacturing and research facilities are affected by various federal, state and local requirements relating to the discharge of materials and the protection of the environment. We make expenditures necessary for compliance with applicable environmental requirements at each of our operating facilities. These regulatory requirements continually change, therefore we cannot predict with certainty future expenditures associated with compliance with environmental requirements.

Environmental Sites

Summary

We are actively involved in the investigation, closure and/or remediation of existing or potential environmental contamination under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) and state Superfund and similar environmental laws at several domestically owned, formerly owned and non-owned locations allegedly resulting from past industrial activity.

In a few cases, we are one of several potentially responsible parties and have agreed to jointly fund the required investigation and remediation, while preserving our defenses to the liability. We may also have rights of contribution or reimbursement from other parties or coverage under applicable insurance policies. We are currently pursuing coverage and recoveries under those policies with respect to certain of the sites, including the St. Helens, OR site, the Macon, GA site and the Elizabeth City, NC site, each of which is summarized below. These efforts include two active and independent litigation matters against legacy primary and excess policy insurance carriers for recovery of fees and costs incurred by us in connection with our investigation and remediation activities for such sites. Other than disclosed below, we are unable to predict the outcome of these matters or the timing of any recoveries, whether through settlement or otherwise. We are also unable to predict the extent to which any recoveries might cover our final share of investigation and remediation costs for these sites. Our final share of investigation and remediation costs may exceed any such recoveries, and such amounts net of insurance recoveries may be material.

In 2017, we entered into settlement agreements totaling $30.5 million with certain legacy insurance carriers to resolve ongoing litigation and recover fees and costs previously incurred by us in connection with certain environmental sites. All of these cash settlements have been released to us from escrow, including $28.7 million received in the first six months of 2018. We anticipate that we may enter into additional settlement agreements in the future which may or may not be material, with other legacy insurers to obtain reimbursement or contribution for environmental site expenses.

Estimates of our future liability at the environmental sites are based on evaluations of currently available facts regarding each individual site. We consider factors such as our activities associated with the site, existing technology, presently enacted laws and regulations and prior company experience in remediating contaminated sites. Although current law imposes joint and several liability on all parties at Superfund sites, our contribution to the remediation of these sites is expected to be limited by the number of other companies potentially liable for site remediation. As a result, our estimated liability reflects only our expected share. In determining the probability of contribution, we consider the solvency of other parties, the site activities of other parties, whether liability is being disputed, the terms of any existing agreements and experience with similar matters, and the effect of our October 2006 Chapter 11 reorganization upon the validity of the claim, if any.

Specific Material Events

St Helens, OR

In August 2010, we entered into a Consent Order (the “Consent Order”) with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (“ODEQ”), along with Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc. (“Kaiser”), and Owens Corning Sales LLC (“OC”), with respect to our St. Helens, OR facility, which was previously owned by Kaiser and then OC. The Consent Order required that we and Kaiser complete a remedial investigation and feasibility study (“RI/FS”) on the portion of the site owned by us (“Owned Property”), which is comprised of Upland and Lowland areas. The Consent Order further required us, Kaiser and OC to conduct an RI/FS in the In-Water area of the adjacent Scappoose Bay. Costs and responsibilities for investigation, including the current RI/FS, for the Owned Property have been shared with Kaiser pursuant to a cost sharing agreement with Kaiser. Costs and responsibilities for the investigation with respect to the in-water areas that we do not own have been shared with Kaiser and OC pursuant to a cost sharing agreement with Kaiser and OC.

On September 14, 2016, the parties submitted a Feasibility Study to the ODEQ proposing remedial action options for the Upland area. We have participated in the investigation phase for the Lowland area of the Owned Property and the Scappoose Bay and worked with the ODEQ, Kaiser and OC to finalize the reports to move to the Feasibility Study phase.

On September 30, 2016, Kaiser filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina (Case No. 16-31602) (the ”Bankruptcy Court”). AWI, OC and the ODEQ have all been included on the master list of potential creditors filed with the Bankruptcy Court for notice purposes. By order dated October 14, 2016, the Bankruptcy Court formed a statutory committee of unsecured creditors, to which we were appointed to serve, along with OC and The Boeing Company. The Committee is charged with, among other things, maximizing recovery of all unsecured creditor claims, including claims of Kaiser and ODEQ. Noticed parties submitted claims to the Bankruptcy Court on September 13, 2017. The Chapter 11 case impacts Kaiser’s ongoing participation in the RI/FS process, as well as the ODEQ consent order and cost sharing agreements.

In November 2017, we participated in voluntary mediation with ODEQ, OC and Kaiser to negotiate a resolution that would discharge Potentially Responsible Parties (“PRPs”) liability for the site. As a result of the mediation, on February 1, 2018, ODEQ issued a Public Notice and a proposed Consent Judgment recommending that, in exchange for a release from ODEQ for all contamination claims against AWI, we would pay $8.6 million to the State of Oregon and perform a previously scoped remedial action for the Upland area of the site. During the fourth quarter of 2017, we increased our reserve for environmental liabilities by $8.6 million as a result of this pending settlement with the State of Oregon. The public comment period has closed and ODEQ published its response to the comments received. On April 5, 2018, ODEQ issued Public Notice of the Remedial Action for the Upland Area and has since responded to public comments. The Consent Judgment remains subject to entry and approval by the Columbia County Circuit Court, which we expect to occur in 2018. On June 26, 2018 ODEQ published its Record of Decision confirming the selected remedial action required for the Upland Area. AWI will be responsible for performing the remedial action upon ODEQ’s filing of the Consent Judgment with the court, pending appeal. Kaiser has asserted that the Consent Judgement violates the stay imposed by its bankruptcy case. We believe Kaiser’s assertions are without merit. A hearing on the applicability of the stay to the Consent Judgment is scheduled with the Bankruptcy Court on July 31, 2018.

Macon, GA

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) has listed two landfills located on a portion of our building products facility in Macon, GA, along with the former Macon Naval Ordnance Plant landfill adjacent to our property, portions of Rocky Creek, and certain tributaries leading to Rocky Creek (collectively, the “Macon Site”) as a Superfund site on the National Priorities List due to the presence of contaminants, most notably polychlorinated biphenyls (“PCBs”).

In September 2010, we entered into an Administrative Order on Consent for a Removal Action with the EPA to investigate PCB contamination in one of the landfills on our property, the Wastewater Treatment Plant Landfill (the “WWTP Landfill,” also known as “Operable Unit 1”). After completing an investigation of the WWTP Landfill and submitting our final Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis. EPA issued an Action Memorandum in July 2013 selecting our recommended remedy for the Removal Action. The Operable Unit 1 response action for the WWTP Landfill is complete and the final report was submitted to the EPA on October 11, 2016. The EPA approved the final report on November 28, 2016, and a Post-Removal Control Plan (the “Plan”) was submitted to the EPA on March 28, 2017. That Plan will monitor the effectiveness of the WWTP Landfill response action and our estimate of future liabilities includes these tasks.

It is probable that we will incur field investigation, engineering and oversight costs associated with a RI/FS with respect to the remainder of the Superfund site, which includes the other landfill on our property, as well as areas on and adjacent to AWI’s property and Rocky Creek (the “Remaining Site,” also known as “Operable Unit 2”). On September 25, 2015, AWI and other PRPs received a Special Notice Letter from the EPA under CERCLA inviting AWI and the PRPs to enter into the negotiation of a Settlement Agreement (formerly known as an Administrative Order on Consent) to conduct an RI/FS of Operable Unit 2. We, along with the other PRPs, submitted a good faith offer to the EPA in response to the Special Notice Letter to conduct RI/FS and are currently negotiating a final agreement with EPA. We have not yet commenced an investigation of this portion of the site. We anticipate that the EPA will require significant investigative work for Operable Unit 2 and that we may ultimately incur costs in remediating any contamination discovered during the RI/FS. The current estimate of future liability at this site includes only our estimated share of the costs of the investigative work that, at this time, we anticipate the EPA will require the PRPs to perform. We are unable to reasonably estimate AWI’s final share of the costs or the total costs associated with the investigation work or any resulting remediation therefrom, although such amounts may be material.

Elizabeth City, NC

This site is a former cabinet manufacturing facility that was operated by Triangle Pacific Corporation, now known as Armstrong Wood Products, Inc. (“Triangle Pacific”), from 1977 until 1996. The site was formerly owned by the U.S. Navy (“Navy”) and Westinghouse, now CBS Corporation (“CBS”). We assumed ownership of the site when we acquired the stock of Triangle Pacific in 1998. Prior to our acquisition, the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources listed the site as a hazardous waste site. In 1997, Triangle Pacific entered into a cost sharing agreement with Westinghouse whereby the parties agreed to share equally in costs associated with investigation and potential remediation. In 2000, Triangle Pacific and CBS entered into an Administrative Order on Consent to conduct an RI/FS with the EPA for the site. In 2007, we and CBS entered into an agreement with the Navy whereby the Navy agreed to pay one third of defined past and future investigative costs up to a certain amount, which has now been exhausted. The EPA approved the RI/FS work plan in August 2011. In January 2014, we submitted the draft Remedial Investigation and Risk Assessment reports and conducted supplemental investigative work based upon agency comments to those reports. The EPA published an Interim Action Proposed Plan for the site in April 2018 seeking public comment through June 7, 2018. EPA is now evaluating comments, including ours, as we work toward a Record Of Decision in 2018. If remediation is required, the related costs may be material, although we expect these costs to be shared with CBS and the Navy.

Summary of Financial Position

Liabilities of $13.1 million as of June 30, 2018 and $13.5 million as of December 31, 2017 were recorded for environmental liabilities that we consider probable and for which a reasonable estimate of the probable liability could be made. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2018, we did not record any additional reserves for potential environmental liabilities. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2017, we recorded reserves for potential environmental liabilities of $0.7 million and $1.3 million, respectively. Where existing data is sufficient to estimate the liability, that estimate has been used; where only a range of probable liabilities is available and no amount within that range is more likely than any other, the lower end of the range has been used. As assessments and remediation activities progress at each site, these liabilities are reviewed to reflect new information as it becomes available, and adjusted to reflect amounts actually incurred and paid. These liabilities are undiscounted.

The estimated liabilities above do not take into account any claims for recoveries from insurance or third parties. It is our policy to record insurance recoveries when probable. For insurance recoveries that are reimbursements of prior environmental expenditures, the income statement impact is recorded within cost of goods sold, SG&A expenses and/or discontinued operations, which are the same income statement categories where environmental expenditures were historically recorded. Insurance recoveries in excess of historical environmental spending, are recorded on the balance sheet as a part of other long-term liabilities and released as future environmental spending occurs or the liability is settled.

The estimated liabilities above do not take into account any claims for recoveries from insurance or third parties. It is our policy to record recoveries as assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Actual costs to be incurred at identified sites may vary from our estimates. Based on our knowledge of the identified sites, it is not possible to reasonably estimate future costs in excess of amounts already recognized.

OTHER CLAIMS

On September 8, 2017, Roxul USA, Inc. (d/b/a Rockfon) filed litigation against us in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware alleging anticompetitive conduct seeking remedial measures and unspecified damages. Roxul USA, Inc. is a significant ceilings systems competitor with global headquarters in Europe and expanding operations in the Americas. We believe the allegations are without merit and intend to vigorously defend the matter. During the first quarter of 2018, the Court denied, in part, and granted, in part, our motion to dismiss, dismissing two of the claims brought by Roxul. The litigation is currently ongoing.

We are involved in other various lawsuits, claims, investigations and other legal matters from time to time that arise in the ordinary course of business, including matters involving our products, intellectual property, relationships with suppliers, relationships with distributors, relationships with competitors, employees and other matters. From time to time, for example, we may be a party to litigation matters that involve product liability, tort liability and other claims under various allegations, including illness due to exposure to certain chemicals used in the workplace; or medical conditions arising from exposure to product ingredients or the presence of trace contaminants. Such allegations may involve multiple defendants and relate to legacy products that we and other defendants purportedly manufactured or sold. We believe that any current claims are without merit and intend to defend them vigorously. For these matters, we also may have rights of contribution or reimbursement from other parties or coverage under applicable insurance policies. When applicable and appropriate, we will pursue coverage and recoveries under those policies, but are unable to predict the outcome of those demands. While complete assurance cannot be given to the outcome of these proceedings, we do not believe that any current claims, individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity or results of operations.