Amazon Heating Pad Settlement Reached To Resolve Lawsuit Over Severe Burns

Claim is one of a growing number of heating pad lawsuits being pursued against Amazon, over injuries allegedly caused by dangerous or defective products sold by third-party sellers on its platform.

A Pennsylvania woman who suffered severe burn injuries from a heating pad purchased on Amazon has reached a confidential settlement to resolve her claims against the online retailer, alleging that the company functioned as the de facto distributor of a dangerously defective product sold by an unverified manufacturer.

Court records indicate that Khadija Karim reached the Amazon heating pad settlement (PDF) on on December 17, resolving the case before it was scheduled to go to trial.

The complaint was filed against Amazon.com earlier this year, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, with Karim claiming that she suffered second-degree burns when a heating pad sold through Amazon’s platform overheated and became impossible to remove during use.

Heating pads are commonly used to ease pain and muscle stiffness by applying localized heat to sore areas of the body. However, when these products are improperly designed or malfunction, they can create serious safety hazards, including burn injuries, electrical shocks or even fires.

Heating Pad Burn Injury Allegations

The lawsuit alleges that Karim purchased the heating pad on Amazon and first used it in April 2023. Without any instructions or safety warnings included, she allowed the device to warm for several minutes before fastening it around her abdomen using an attached buckle.

Shortly after applying the device, Karim claims it became extremely hot. When she attempted to remove the heating pad, the buckle strap allegedly failed to release, leaving the device fastened to her body as it continued to overheat.

According to the complaint, Karim suffered painful second-degree burns that later became infected. She alleged the injuries could have been prevented with safer design features commonly used in similar products, including mechanisms to limit heat output and allow for quick removal.

Amazon Settles Heating Pad Lawsuit

The lawsuit alleged that the heating pad was manufactured by a company identified as “Yeamons,” which purported to operate out of a generic address in London. However, Karim’s attorneys claimed their investigation found no evidence that Yeamons was a legitimate business entity subject to U.S. jurisdiction.

As a result, Karim named Amazon as the sole defendant, alleging the company imported and distributed a defective product from an unvetted or potentially fictitious manufacturer. The lawsuit argued that Amazon failed to adequately screen third-party sellers and products before making them available to U.S. consumers.

Karim asserted claims of strict product liability, negligence and breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, seeking damages for her injuries and related losses.

On December 17, the parties notified the court that they had reached a settlement resolving all claims. Under the notice filed with the court, each side agreed to bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees, and the parties indicated they were finalizing dismissal paperwork in accordance with the court’s procedures. The terms of the settlement were not disclosed in the public filing.

Amazon Defective Product Lawsuits

The heating pad case is one of several recent lawsuits seeking to hold Amazon accountable for injuries linked to defective consumer products sold by third-party vendors through its platform.

In a complaint filed earlier in 2025, Amazon was named as a defendant in a pressure cooker explosion lawsuit after a child allegedly suffered severe scalding injuries when an Instant Pot purchased through the company’s website opened while still pressurized. The lawsuit claims Amazon allowed the dangerously defective product to be sold despite prior recalls and documented concerns involving failures of the cooker’s lid-locking system.

The lawsuit was brought solely against Amazon, with the child’s mother alleging that the manufacturer, Instant Brands Inc., had already sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection following a surge of similar pressure cooker injury lawsuits, leaving Amazon as the only viable defendant.

Amazon’s role in such cases has drawn increased scrutiny following determinations by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission that the company may qualify as a distributor under federal law, potentially making it responsible for recalling unsafe products. Amazon has consistently challenged that designation and continues to dispute liability for products sold by independent third-party sellers.

Sign up for more legal news that could affect you or your family.