Rogers Corporation — Asbestos-Containing Products Reference

Manufacturer: Rogers Corporation Headquarters: Chandler, AZ (formerly Rogers, CT) Founded: 1832 Documented Asbestos Use: Through approximately 1978 Product Categories: Phenolic-resin molding compounds, electrical insulating laminates

Company History

Rogers Corporation is one of the oldest continuously operating specialty materials manufacturers in the United States, tracing its origins to 1832 in Rogers, Connecticut. For most of its history, the company focused on engineered materials for industrial and electrical applications — a niche that placed its products in factories, manufacturing plants, and electrical assembly operations across the country throughout the twentieth century.

During the mid-twentieth century, Rogers Corporation operated as a significant supplier of phenolic-resin-based molding compounds and electrical insulating laminates. These materials were prized by industrial manufacturers for their heat resistance, dimensional stability, and dielectric properties — characteristics that made them well-suited for switchgear components, motor housings, electrical panels, and a wide range of molded industrial parts. The company supplied these compounds to fabricators and contract molders who produced finished components for industrial, commercial, and consumer product markets.

According to asbestos litigation records, Rogers Corporation incorporated asbestos fibers into certain phenolic molding compounds and laminate products during the postwar manufacturing era, a period when asbestos was widely used as a reinforcing and heat-resistant filler in thermosetting plastics. The company is reported to have ceased using asbestos as a component material in its compounds by approximately 1978, coinciding with increased regulatory scrutiny of asbestos in manufactured products.

Rogers Corporation has since relocated its headquarters to Chandler, Arizona, and has transformed into a high-technology advanced materials company. Its current product lines bear no relation to the asbestos-containing compounds manufactured in earlier decades.

Asbestos-Containing Products

According to asbestos litigation records, Rogers Corporation manufactured and sold phenolic molding compounds containing asbestos fiber during the 1940s through approximately 1978. Court filings document that these materials were used by industrial molders and fabricators as raw input materials, from which finished parts were pressed, machined, and assembled.

RX462 Asbestos-Filled Phenolic Molding Compound: Plaintiffs alleged that the RX462 compound contained asbestos as a functional filler, incorporated to improve the material’s mechanical strength, heat tolerance, and flow characteristics during the molding process. This compound was marketed for general-purpose industrial molding applications. Court filings document that the RX462 was supplied in bulk form — typically as granular or pelletized resin — and that workers at molding operations were exposed to the compound during weighing, blending, loading into presses, and finishing of molded parts.

RX466 High-Heat Phenolic Compound: According to asbestos litigation records, the RX466 was a higher-performance formulation of Rogers Corporation’s phenolic compound line, designed for applications requiring greater thermal resistance. Plaintiffs alleged that this compound also contained asbestos fiber as a reinforcing component. The RX466 was reportedly used in applications involving elevated operating temperatures, such as electrical switchgear, motor components, and industrial equipment parts.

Duroid Insulating Laminates: Court filings document that Rogers Corporation produced Duroid-brand insulating laminates during the relevant period. These laminate sheets and boards were used extensively in electrical and electronic applications as insulating substrates and structural components. Plaintiffs alleged that certain Duroid laminate products manufactured during the asbestos era incorporated asbestos fiber within the resin matrix. Duroid materials were used in electrical panel assemblies, switchboards, transformer components, and related electrical insulating applications.

The asbestos fibers used in phenolic molding compounds and laminates of this type were typically chrysotile, though litigation records from similar compound manufacturers have also identified amphibole fiber use in certain specialty formulations. The specific fiber types used in Rogers Corporation compounds have been a subject of litigation discovery.

Occupational Exposure

Workers who processed Rogers Corporation phenolic molding compounds and laminates faced potential asbestos exposure at multiple points in the manufacturing chain. Asbestos litigation records identify several categories of workers at particular risk.

Molding Plant Workers: Industrial molding operations that purchased Rogers Corporation compounds as raw materials — including facilities such as Koller Craft in Fenton, Missouri, and Square D in Columbia, Missouri, as well as similar Midwest contract molding and electrical equipment manufacturing plants — employed workers who handled these materials daily. According to court filings, tasks including weighing and measuring bulk compound, charging hydraulic and compression mold presses, and removing finished parts from molds could generate respirable dust in the work environment. Plaintiffs alleged that this dust contained asbestos fibers released from the compound during processing.

Deflashing and Finishing Workers: After phenolic parts were removed from molds, they typically required deflashing — the removal of excess resin that squeezed between mold surfaces during pressing. Court filings document that deflashing and finishing operations, whether performed manually with hand tools or mechanically with tumbling barrels or grinding equipment, released particulate from the cured phenolic material. Plaintiffs alleged that this particulate included asbestos fibers locked within the resin matrix that were liberated during abrasive finishing.

Machinists and Fabricators: Phenolic laminates such as Duroid required cutting, drilling, routing, and machining to produce finished insulating components. According to asbestos litigation records, these dry machining operations on asbestos-containing laminate materials generated significant quantities of fine dust. Workers at electrical equipment manufacturers and fabricating shops who cut Duroid or similar laminates to specification were alleged to have experienced repeated inhalation exposure to asbestos-containing particulate.

Maintenance and Janitorial Workers: In molding plant environments, maintenance workers who serviced presses and mixing equipment, and janitorial workers who swept or cleaned work areas, were also identified in court filings as potentially exposed individuals. Plaintiffs alleged that settled dust containing asbestos fibers accumulated on surfaces, equipment, and floors in areas where phenolic compounds were processed.

The latency period for asbestos-related diseases — typically ranging from ten to fifty years between initial exposure and diagnosis — means that workers employed at molding operations during the 1940s through 1978 may only now be experiencing symptoms of asbestos-related illness, including mesothelioma, asbestosis, lung cancer, and other asbestos-associated conditions.

Rogers Corporation is classified as a Tier 2 manufacturer for purposes of asbestos litigation reference: the company has been named in asbestos personal injury litigation, and court filings document claims related to its phenolic molding compounds and insulating laminates, but Rogers Corporation has not established a Section 524(g) asbestos bankruptcy trust fund. This means that claims against Rogers Corporation are pursued through conventional civil litigation rather than through a trust claims process.

Because no dedicated asbestos trust exists for Rogers Corporation, individuals alleging exposure to its products must pursue legal remedies through direct litigation against the company or through claims against other responsible parties — including employers, premises owners, or co-defendants — who may be covered by existing asbestos bankruptcy trusts.

Workers diagnosed with mesothelioma or other asbestos-related diseases after exposure to phenolic molding compounds or insulating laminates at Midwest manufacturing facilities and similar operations may have claims involving multiple manufacturers and defendants. Many cases involving Rogers Corporation products have also implicated other compound and laminate suppliers, as well as the manufacturers of the finished electrical equipment in which Rogers-sourced components were incorporated.

If you or a family member worked at an industrial molding facility, electrical equipment manufacturer, or fabricating shop between the 1940s and late 1970s and handled phenolic molding compounds or insulating laminates — including Rogers Corporation’s RX462, RX466, or Duroid products — and have since been diagnosed with mesothelioma, asbestosis, or lung cancer, the following points are relevant to understanding your options:

  • No Rogers Corporation asbestos trust fund exists. Claims cannot be submitted through a trust claims administrator. Legal action proceeds through civil litigation.
  • Other trust funds may apply. Depending on the full history of materials used at your workplace, claims against other asbestos bankruptcy trusts — covering raw fiber suppliers, other compound manufacturers, or equipment makers — may be available in parallel with any litigation involving Rogers Corporation.
  • Exposure documentation matters. Employment records, co-worker testimony, material safety data sheets, and purchasing records from molding operations can help establish product identification and occupational exposure history.
  • Statutes of limitations apply. Time limits for filing asbestos claims vary and generally begin running from the date of diagnosis, not the date of exposure. Prompt consultation with an attorney experienced in asbestos litigation is advisable.

This article is provided as a factual reference resource for workers, families, and legal professionals researching occupational asbestos exposure history. It does not constitute legal advice.