On September 10, 2025, the NAM filed an amicus brief asking the 6th Circuit to uphold the dismissal of a consumer fraud no-injury class action against a manufacturer. In this case, the plaintiffs claim that Whirlpool’s ranges have a latent defect in their control knobs, making them susceptible to unintentional actuation and creating the risk of hazardous conditions—yet none of the plaintiffs’ ranges were inoperable nor caused any injuries. The plaintiffs further claim that Whirlpool had presale knowledge of the defect based on eight unvetted consumer complaints posted to the CPSC database. The district court correctly dismissed these claims for failure to allege the manufacturers’ presale knowledge of the defect. In a split decision by a three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit, the dismissal was reversed. The case is now back before the 6th Circuit on a petition for rehearing en banc.
Our amicus brief explains the importance of maintaining rigorous pleading standards surrounding a defendant’s knowledge of a product’s safety risks—not just product defects alleged by faceless consumers—before subjecting manufacturers to liability. The brief also discusses the practical consequences of exposing manufacturers to liability when their products work as advertised, based merely on the possibility of a safety risk stemming from user error.