A Ninja blender lawsuit is a product liability claim against SharkNinja Operating LLC alleging that the blender’s stacked blade assembly, lid, or packaging caused injury during ordinary use. Individual suits are active in federal courts in New Jersey, Massachusetts, and elsewhere as of mid-2026. A separate attempt to bring a nationwide class action over deceptive marketing was dismissed in July 2025, and attorneys handling the injury cases have said individual suits are the more viable route because each injury is different.1Lawsuit Legal News. Ninja Pressure Cooker Recall
What the Lawsuits Allege
The complaints share a common mechanical theory. Ninja blenders use a column of stacked, razor-sharp blades that sit loose inside the pitcher rather than locking into it. Plaintiffs say that design lets the blades slide out when the container is tilted for pouring, and in some cases lets the cup detach from the motor base while the blades are still spinning.2Johnson Becker. Ninja Blender Lawsuit
Claims generally fall into three categories:
- Design defect. The stacked blade assembly does not latch or lock inside the pitcher, and gravity alone can pull it out during pouring or cleaning. Some complaints also allege the cup can separate from the base mid-blend.2Johnson Becker. Ninja Blender Lawsuit
- Failure to warn. SharkNinja is alleged to have inadequately warned users about blade detachment and about the risk of blending hot liquids, which can build pressure inside a sealed pitcher.3Schmidt Law. Ninja Blender Lawsuit
- Defective packaging. At least one lawsuit alleges the blades shipped with only flimsy plastic wrapping, or none at all, cutting consumers as they unboxed the appliance.2Johnson Becker. Ninja Blender Lawsuit
Products and Injuries Involved
The suits reach well beyond the models covered by the 2015 recall. Named products include the Ninja Professional Plus Blender (Model BN701), the Nutri Ninja BL480, the Ninja Mega Kitchen System BL770, the Nutri Ninja Blender Duo, the Ninja Nutri-Blender Pro, and various Ninja Foodi blender models.3Schmidt Law. Ninja Blender Lawsuit
Reported injuries are mostly severe lacerations to the hands and fingers, some deep enough to reach bone, along with tendon damage, nerve injuries, and permanent scarring. The most serious complaints describe partial loss of hand function or fingertip amputations. Others cite cuts to the upper leg and burns to the chest, arms, neck, and face when hot contents erupted from the pitcher.3Schmidt Law. Ninja Blender Lawsuit
The injuries tend to happen in a few recurring ways. A user pours from the pitcher and the unsecured blades slide out into a cup or onto a hand. A cup detaches from the motor base, leaving spinning blades exposed. Or a lid fails and hot contents escape. In one reported incident, a Nutri Ninja BL480 cup allegedly shot off its base from internal pressure, exposing the user to spinning blades.2Johnson Becker. Ninja Blender Lawsuit A May 2025 suit involved second-degree burns after the lid on a Ninja Nutri-Blender Pro allegedly exploded off during blending.3Schmidt Law. Ninja Blender Lawsuit
The 2015 Recall and Its Limits
On November 12, 2015, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission announced a recall of about 1.1 million Ninja BL660-series professional blenders sold in the United States, plus roughly 99,000 in Canada, tied to 53 reported laceration injuries.4U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Laceration Injuries Prompt SharkNinja to Recall Ninja BL660 Blenders The units had sold from March 2012 through September 2015 for about $140.5ABC13. SharkNinja Issues Recall After Blenders Cause Laceration Injuries
The recall did not require SharkNinja to collect the blenders or pull them from shelves. The company issued revised safety instructions telling consumers to pour through the locked lid’s spout or to remove the blade assembly before pouring.6Costco. Ninja Professional Blender BL663CO Recall Documents Many of the products now in litigation, including the BN701, BL480, BL770, and Nutri-Blender Pro, were not part of that recall.
Where the Cases Stand
Several individual suits illustrate the state of the litigation. In March 2023, Angela Cappelletti sued SharkNinja in New York, alleging that the stacked blade assembly failed to lock and fell from the pitcher during use, causing severe lacerations.7PR Newswire. Ninja Blender Injury Lawsuit Filed in New York
In October 2024, Mikayla Lapinski filed a federal complaint in the District of New Jersey involving the Ninja Professional Plus Blender BN701. She alleges she was cut by an uncovered loose blade while opening the box on November 30, 2022.8PR Newswire. Johnson Becker Files Lawsuit in Federal Court Against SharkNinja Due to Ninja Professional Plus Blender Injuries As of June 2026, discovery is complete and SharkNinja’s motion for summary judgment and motion to exclude the plaintiff’s expert are pending.9PACER Monitor. Lapinski v. SharkNinja Operating LLC
Jessica Duquesnay filed suit in Norfolk Superior Court in Massachusetts on May 8, 2026, alleging the double stacked blade assembly of her Ninja Mega Kitchen System BL770 detached during a smoothie preparation on May 10, 2024, severely lacerating her left hand. SharkNinja removed the case to federal court in June 2026.10AboutLawsuits.com. Ninja Kitchen Blender Lawsuit Blade Assembly Detached Sliced Womans Hand11PACER Monitor. Duquesnay v. SharkNinja Operating LLC
Not every case has held up. On September 24, 2025, a federal judge in the District of Colorado dismissed a blender injury suit against SharkNinja after finding the plaintiff’s expert opinions unreliable and inadmissible. The complaint had alleged a design defect caused a spill of hot contents.12Law360. SharkNinja Gets Expert Suit Alleging Blender Injury Tossed
The Class Action Was Dismissed
In Zamani v. SharkNinja, Inc., filed in the District of Massachusetts, the plaintiff alleged SharkNinja deceptively marketed its blenders by concealing the blade assembly’s risks. On July 7, 2025, Judge Allison D. Burroughs granted SharkNinja’s motion to dismiss, ruling the plaintiff had not shown the company’s advertising was materially misleading. The court noted that information about the blade assembly and its associated risks had been disclosed on the product’s Amazon listing, available to the plaintiff before purchase.13Bloomberg Law. SharkNinja Beats Consumers Defective Deceptive Blenders Claims
No public settlements or trial verdicts have been reported in the blender cases. SharkNinja continues to sell Ninja-branded blenders while defending the pending suits.