Consumers who used an Instant Pot Duo, Duo Nova or Duo Plus pressure cooker have reported a lid problem. The lid can be forced open while the pot is still pressurized, spraying hot contents and causing burns.
A proposed class action, Havens v. Instant Brands, accuses the maker of breaching its express and implied warranties by concealing a lid defect from consumers before it sold the product.
Instant Brands filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in June 2023. A federal court confirmed its reorganization plan in February 2024, a status that can affect how new claims against the company move forward.
- Case or litigation name: Havens et al. v. Instant Brands, Inc. (proposed federal class action)
- Defendants: Instant Brands, Inc. (formerly Double Insight, Inc., d/b/a Instant Pot Company)
- Court and docket number, when available: U.S. District Court, N.D. Ill., Case No. 1:22-cv-02909 (docket number from the filed complaint’s caption; search pcl.uscourts.gov, the federal judiciary’s own PACER Case Locator)
- MDL number, judge, and case count, when an MDL exists: No MDL – JPML Pending MDL Dockets report, September 1, 2026, names no pressure-cooker docket
- Filing date: June 2, 2022
- Main allegations: Breach of warranty and unjust enrichment: the Duo’s lid can be removed while still pressurized, expelling hot contents; failure to disclose the defect
- Products or people involved: Instant Pot® Duo Series, Duo Plus, Duo Evo Plus, Duo Crisp, Duo Nova and Duo SV pressure cookers
Table Of Contents
- Latest Instant Pot Duo Pressure Cooker Lawsuit Updates
- Who May Be Affected?
- Reported Injuries or Damages
- Evidence to Preserve
- Filing Deadlines
- Potential Compensation
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Is There an Instant Pot Duo Recall?
- Did the Plaintiffs Notify Instant Brands Before Filing the Lawsuit?
- Was Instant Brands Aware of Reported Burns Before the Lawsuit Was Filed?
- What Legal Claims Does the Havens Complaint Raise?
- What Do Hospital Studies Show About Pressure Cooker Burn Severity?
- Has Instant Brands Settled Any Instant Pot Duo Pressure Cooker Lawsuit Claims?
- References
Latest Instant Pot Duo Pressure Cooker Lawsuit Updates
February 22, 2024: Bankruptcy Court Confirms Instant Brands’ Reorganization Plan
Instant Brands announced that the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas had confirmed the company’s Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization [1].
The company said it expected to emerge from bankruptcy within weeks under new ownership. Its housewares business, including Instant Pot, continued to operate through the transition, with no interruption reported for existing litigation against the company.
June 14, 2023: Court Approves Instant Brands’ First-Day Bankruptcy Motions
Two days after filing for Chapter 11, Instant Brands received court approval for its “First Day” motions, including interim debtor-in-possession financing of up to $100 million [2].
That interim financing was split between up to $125.0 million in asset-based revolving credit and $132.5 million in a term loan, giving the company cash to keep producing and shipping products, including the Duo, while the case moved forward.
June 12, 2023: Instant Brands Files for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy
Instant Brands, Inc. filed voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions in the same Texas bankruptcy court on June 12, 2023, citing a need to strengthen its finances.
The company said entities outside the United States and Canada were excluded from the filing. That same filing noted the bankruptcy did not pause the Havens class action, filed a year earlier, which kept moving through federal court separately.
June 2, 2022: Havens Class Action Filed Against Instant Brands
Michelle Havens and Elsie Wilkerson filed a proposed nationwide class action, Havens et al. v. Instant Brands, Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on June 2, 2022.
The complaint seeks damages, restitution and injunctive relief on behalf of a proposed nationwide class of Duo buyers, plus separate relief for California and Florida subclasses.
Who May Be Affected?
You may be affected if you purchased, owned or used a pressure cooker in the Instant Pot Duo lineup. This includes the Duo, Duo Nova, Duo Plus, Duo Evo Plus, Duo Crisp and Duo SV, since September 27, 2013.
Your Duo’s lid may have opened, detached or come loose while you were using it, letting hot contents escape and cause burns. That matches the pattern the Havens complaint and its cited consumer reports describe.
But owning a model from that September 27, 2013-forward class period does not by itself establish a claim. An individual legal review is the way to find out whether your specific facts support one.
Reported Injuries or Damages
The Havens class action does not allege its named plaintiffs, Michelle Havens and Elsie Wilkerson, were burned by their Instant Pot Duo.
It is a warranty and unjust-enrichment claim seeking damages and restitution for buyers who say they would not have bought the Duo had Instant Brands disclosed the defect.
The complaint quotes at least a dozen consumer reports Instant Brands received. They describe second- and third-degree burns, scalding and burn-unit treatment.
The complaint offers these consumer reports as evidence that Instant Brands knew of the lid defect before selling the product to consumers.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission‘s injury-surveillance database recorded 759 actual pressure-cooker injury cases treated at U.S. emergency departments between 2003 and 2019, producing a national estimate of about 28,337 injuries over that period [3].
That count is not specific to the Instant Pot Duo, but it shows the scale of burn injuries this type of product can cause. Reports of an injury are not proof a product caused it.
Other pressure cooker brands, including the Farberware Pressure Cooker, face similar lawsuits alleging burns from lids that opened during use, in unrelated cases.
Evidence to Preserve
If you believe an Instant Pot Duo pressure cooker burned you or a family member, keep the following records and items on hand:
- The pressure cooker itself, including its lid, base, and the model or serial number printed on the underside
- Your original purchase receipt, order confirmation, or warranty registration showing when and where you bought the Duo
- Photographs or video of the product, the lid, and the scene right after the incident happened
- Photographs of any burn injury as it heals, along with medical records and bills from every visit for treatment
- Any written or email communication with Instant Brands about the product, a return, or the injury
Keeping these records and items intact can make an individual legal review far more useful if you later decide to pursue a claim.
Filing Deadlines
Deadlines for a product-liability claim come from state law, not federal law, and the exact period depends on where you live.
The clock often starts on the date of the injury, though some states start it later, when a person reasonably connects the injury to the product.
Because Instant Brands has gone through Chapter 11 bankruptcy, a new claim may also involve separate court procedures in the bankruptcy case. A lawyer can confirm which apply before a claim is lost.
Potential Compensation
Depending on the facts of an individual case, people affected by a defective Instant Pot Duo may be able to pursue certain categories of damages. These can include medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, scarring, and emotional distress.
Compensation amounts vary by case. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Potential compensation has not been set in any Instant Pot Duo case, since no settlement or court verdict specific to the Duo has been publicly reported.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is There an Instant Pot Duo Recall?
No, there is no CPSC recall for the Instant Pot Duo, Duo Nova or Duo Plus. CPSC has recalled two other Instant Pot models. The 2015 Smart/Smart-60 was recalled for a shock hazard, and the 2018 Gem 65 multicooker for a fire hazard, but neither is a Duo model.
Did the Plaintiffs Notify Instant Brands Before Filing the Lawsuit?
Yes, the plaintiffs notified Instant Brands before filing the lawsuit. Michelle Havens sent a written notice of Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act violations on September 13, 2021. Elsie Wilkerson sent a similar notice four days later, before the June 2022 filing.
Was Instant Brands Aware of Reported Burns Before the Lawsuit Was Filed?
Yes, Instant Brands was aware of reported burns before the lawsuit was filed. According to the complaint, consumer reports describing Duo burns began arriving as early as March 2016, years before the 2022 class action, with several more cited through 2017.
What Legal Claims Does the Havens Complaint Raise?
The Havens complaint raises nine legal claims: breach of express and implied warranty, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, fraud by omission and unjust enrichment nationwide, plus four claims limited to California and Florida subclasses, including the Song-Beverly and Consumers Legal Remedies Acts.
What Do Hospital Studies Show About Pressure Cooker Burn Severity?
Hospital studies show pressure cooker burns can be severe. A burn-center study found 92.7% of pressure-cooker burn patients had second-degree burns. Nearly a third needed a surgical procedure called escharotomy, which relieves pressure from swelling tissue.
Has Instant Brands Settled Any Instant Pot Duo Pressure Cooker Lawsuit Claims?
No settlement or court verdict tied to the Instant Pot Duo Pressure Cooker lawsuit against Instant Brands has been publicly reported. A pressure-cooker jury verdict exists in a separate, unrelated case against Sunbeam Products, a different manufacturer.
References
- https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/instant-brands-restructuring-plan-confirmed-by-court-302069354.html
- https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/instant-brands-provides-update-on-court-supervised-process-301851230.html
- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37666516/