Judge Grants Class Certification in Harmful Orthodontic Pacifier Suit

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Harmful Orthodontic Pacifier Class Action Lawsuit Overview: 

• Who: Parents filed a class action lawsuit against Newell Brands Inc. and NUK USA LLC that alleges the companies’ “orthodontic” pacifiers are harmful to toddlers, contrary to their advertisements.
• Why: An Illinois judge granted class certification to the lawsuit.
• Where: The lawsuit was filed in Illinois federal court.

An Illinois judge has granted certification in a class action lawsuit against Newell Brands Inc. and NUK USA LLC, in which the plaintiffs claim that the companies’ “orthodontic” pacifiers are harmful to toddlers.

“Ultimately, the Court concludes that class-wide resolution would substantially advance this case,” U.S. District Judge Ronald A. Guzman said in his order that certified two classes, one for all purchasers of the pacifiers and one for those who purchased the pacifiers for children 2 years of age or older.

Judge Guzman also added the specific states of California, Florida, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York and Washington to the class definition for clarity. Previously, the lawsuit had asked for certification for purchasers “in the state of Illinois or any state with similar laws.”

Parents Claim ‘Orthodontic’ Pacifiers Are Not Safe For Toddlers

Lead Plaintiffs Shelly Benson and Lisa Caparellil claim they each purchased at least one of the “orthodontic pacifiers” for their children specifically because of the advertisement claiming that the product was appropriate for toddlers.

The plaintiffs say that they and many other customers were financially injured by the companies’ misrepresentations because had they known that the pacifiers did not work as advertised and could do damage to children’s oral development, they would not have purchased them.

The Newell pacifier class action lawsuit claims that the advertisements around the pacifiers are misleading because prolonged pacifier use by children over the age of 24 months can cause various oral and dental problems.

The customers say Newell and NUK should have been aware that pacifier use by older children could cause injury. They claim that the companies put children at risk in the interest of maximizing their profits.

A telephonic status hearing is set for Dec. 8, 2021, at 10:45 a.m. to discuss the next steps in the case. 

Have you purchased a NUK pacifier because of advertised benefits? Let us know in the comments below.

The customers are represented by Katrina Carroll, R. Bruce Carlson, Edward J. Kilpela and Bryan A. Fox of Carlson Lynch LLP, Daniel L. Warshaw, Melissa S. Weiner and Joseph C. Bourne of Pearson Simon & Warshaw LLP and Patrick W. Michenfelder of Throndset Michenfelder Law Office.

The Harmful Orthodontic Pacifier False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Shelly Benson, et al. v. Newell Brands Inc., et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-06836, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Recall Check: Costco, Lowe’s Sold Playhouse Now Recalled, Risk of Kids Trapped in Roof
• COVID-19 Triggers Slew of Class Action Lawsuits Over School Fees, Mask and Vaccine Mandates
• Recall Check: Tastykake Cupcakes Recalled Due To Potential Fragments of Metal Mesh Wire
• Conagra Must Show Chicken Labels Inspected, Approved by Regulators, Says Ninth Circuit