​​Class Action Alleging Sketchers Light-Up Shoes Cause Burns Tossed

Skechers Light-Up Shoes Class Action Lawsuit Overview: 

• Who: A judge has tossed a class action lawsuit alleging Sketchers light-up shoes cause burns.
• What: The judge said lead plaintiff Rikki Guajardo failed to prove her claims of fraud and deception.
• Where: The lawsuit was filed in Illinois.

A class action lawsuit alleging that Skechers light-up shoes can cause burns has been dismissed for good after a federal judge ruled that Plaintiff Rikki Guajardo had not supported her fraud claims, despite a number of chances to amend them.

US District Judge Sara Darrow dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice saying that Guajardo continued to “rehash” arguments from her previously dismissed complaint, and failed to prove her allegations brought under the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act (ICFA) and Uniform Deceptive Business Practice Act (UDPA).

Guajardo had claimed Skechers Energy Lights shoes contain a battery and electrical system that can malfunction and cause burns. In her class action lawsuit, she alleged her 6-year-old son was burned by the shoes.

Guajardo claimed the company knew about the burns that could be caused by its light-up shoes, but failed to warn her and other consumers.

Skechers fought the class action lawsuit, arguing the plaintiff had not adequately demonstrated that the company made false statements about the shoes, which are popular among children.

Since the original class action lawsuit was filed, the plaintiff has submitted two amended complaints; however, Skechers maintained – and Darrow agreed — that the plaintiff’s fraud allegations remained insufficient.

Skechers Light-Up Shoes Class Action Dismissed Permanently 

Darrow wrote that because Guajardo’s Illinois Consumer Fraud Act and Deceptive Business Practice Act claims both rested on allegations of deceptive conduct, they both were subject to heightened pleading standards.

“Specifically, the complaint must identify the who, what, when, where, and how of the alleged fraud.”

However, Guajardo’s latest claim re-pleads her original claim, alleging Skechers concealed, suppressed, and intentionally omitted material facts, but without adding any new material information of how, concluded the judge. 

In 2020, the court dismissed the previous iteration of her claim, saying Guajardo did not allege any “direct statements that contain material omissions,” only “opportunities or locations where Skechers could have disclosed the alleged defect.”

“While Guajardo included two new statements from Skechers in her Second Amended Complaint … she does not address them in her response. Thus, any argument that those new statements support her ICFA claim is waived,” Darrow wrote.

Darrow added that even if Guajardo had alleged a deceptive misrepresentation or omission, there was a UDTPA-specific reason for dismissing her UDTPA claim: “She failed to allege she is likely to be damaged in the future by Skechers’ allegedly deceptive trade practices.”

Throughout the litigation, Skechers argued the class action lawsuit failed to identify a statement or omission by the company that amounted to fraud. The company said that the Guajardo did not point to an instance in which Skechers discusses the shoes’ battery while omitting the alleged defect.

Have you purchased Skechers light-up shoes? Have you noticed any problems? Tell us about your experience in the comment section below.

Guajardo is represented by Gregory Coleman and Lisa White of Greg Coleman Law PC and Kyle Shamberg of Carlson Lynch LLP.

The Skechers Light-Up Shoes Class Action Lawsuit is Guajardo v. Skechers USA Inc., Case No. 4:19-cv-04104, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Class Certification Given To Consumers Who Claim LuLaRoe Charged Sales Tax In Exempt Areas
• Toyota Priuses Smell Like Urine, Sweaty Socks, Class Action Lawsuit Alleges
• Firefighter Turnout Gear May Protect from Heat, But Expose Skin to Toxins
• What is Secondary Exposure to Asbestos?