An early decision in a legal fight is a significant victory for 3M, says the company, but Minnesota disputes that.
The state is suing 3M for alleged damage to the environment from perfluorinated chemicals, once manufactured by the company.
The judge in the case is requiring the state to answer questions posed by the company.
It's all a matter of procedure, says Ben Wogsland, spokesman for the state attorney general's office.
"3M had indicated they wanted some additional supplementary answers to certain interrogatories that the state had indicated it was willing to do so, but 3M nevertheless brought a motion to compel in front of the court," Wogsland said. "That's part of the discovery process, sometimes that happens."
Meanwhile, 3M is asking the court to require the Met Council to pay for discharging PFCs into rivers in Minnesota from its wastewater treatment plants. The Met Council joined the state's lawsuit against 3M.
Published health studies do not show a link between PFCs and human disease.