United States District Court Western District of Washington at Seattle
Class Action Complaint
Case: 2:26-cv-02083
An alleged defect in Stanley cup products is causing the handle to detach suddenly, causing contents of the cup to spill. When the liquid in the cup is hot, it can lead to severe burns.
Background
For over a century, Stanley has positioned itself to consumers as a trusted source of innovative drinkware solutions that provide durability, reliability, and safety for carrying hot and cold beverages. Stanley’s brand recognition and reputation for quality are central to its marketing strategy and consumer appeal in the competitive drinkware and thermos industry.
Stanley’s product offerings include bottles and thermoses containing a “clip” handle assembly, which Stanley represents as premium, durable drinkware solutions designed for safe transport of hot and cold liquids. The products come in various sizes (1–1.5 quarts) and retail for approximately $36.00–$45.00.
The products all contain a latent defect that, under normal and intended use, the handle clip assembly progressively fails, causing the handle to detach suddenly and without warning during use. The defect is concealed beneath other metal components of the handle assembly, rendering it latent and unobservable to consumers.
The handle clip assembly is essentially the critical safety component. When the handle clips fail, the handle detaches from the bottle suddenly and without warning during normal use, causing the entire vacuum bottle to prematurely fail and become unusable. As consumers frequently use the products to transport hot beverages such as coffee, tea, soup, or other heated liquids, the sudden detachment can cause scalding hot liquid to spill onto the user, resulting in severe burns.
A lawsuit in 2025 was filed by a consumer when the handle detached causing sever burns to his groin area. This lawsuit put the defendants on direct notice of the defect and the serious safety risks posed by the products.
Based on engineering and design knowledge, defendants have known since the products were created that those clips would be susceptible to progressive failure under ordinary use conditions. Defendants’ knowledge of the defect is further evidenced by consumer complaints, warranty claims, and online reviews reporting handle failures during normal use of the products. Despite knowledge of handle failures causing severe burns and other injuries, defendants continued to manufacture, market, and sell the products without disclosure of the defect or adequate warnings.
Defendants fail to disclose the known defect or to provide consumers with non-defective replacements. Indeed, rather than providing consumers with new, non-defective products after their units failed as a result of the defect, defendants failed to adequately remedy the defect. When consumers make warranty claims to defendants regarding handle failures, defendants mislead and deceive consumers by denying that handle detachment constitutes a defect, attributing failures to consumer misuse rather than design and manufacturing defects, and providing inadequate remedies that do not address the underlying defect. Some consumers have had their products replaced, only to receive equally defective replacement units with the same handle clip assembly defect.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants’ concealment of the defect, their failure to warn customers about the defect before their purchase, and their failure to recall the products or remedy the defect, plaintiffs and similarly situated customers purchased and used defendants’ defective products when they otherwise would not have made such purchases on the same terms or at all, or
Pacific Market International, LLC designs, manufactures, markets, and distributes the products at issue throughout the United States. PMI WW Brands, LLC is a subsidiary of Pacific Market International, LLC that designs, produces, and markets Stanley 1913 products. The HAVI Group, L.P. is the parent company of Pacific Market International, LLC and participated in the distribution and oversight of the product line at issue.
There are 12 causes of action.
Bryson attorneys: Andrew Lemmon, Daniel Bryson