NUK Class Action Lawsuit: Are "100% Sustainable" Pacifiers Misleading?

Case Overview: A class action lawsuit alleges that NUK's "100% Sustainable Silicone Pacifier" is misleadingly marketed.

Consumers Affected: Consumers who purchased NUK "100% Sustainable Silicone Pacifier."

Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division

A proposed class action lawsuit has been filed against NUK, alleging that the company falsely marketed its "NUK for Nature 100% Sustainable Silicone Pacifier" as environmentally friendly. 

Plaintiffs Moussa Kouyate, Genesis Johnson, Angel Benitez, and Elizabeth Zmrhal filed the class action complaint against Nuk USA LLC, Graco Children’s Products Inc. and Newell Brands Inc. on Sept. 9 in a Georgia federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer laws.

The lawsuit claims that NUK's representations, including the statement that the pacifier was "100% sustainable," misled consumers into believing they were purchasing a product with minimal environmental impact.

“To put it simply, Defendants have dramatically overstated the environmental benefits of the Pacifier, and this is likely to, and did mislead consumers,” the lawsuit states.

‘100% Sustainable’ Claim Under Scrutiny

The plaintiffs argue that by labeling the product as "100% sustainable," NUK was legally obligated to deliver on that promise—a standard the product allegedly does not meet.

According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Green Guides, companies are discouraged from making broad and unqualified environmental benefit claims, as they are difficult to substantiate and likely to mislead consumers, the plaintiffs say.

They argue that NUK's "100% sustainable" label falls into this category, as neither the silicone nor the pacifier as a whole can be considered fully sustainable.

Plaintiffs Claim Silicone Manufacturing Harms The Environment

The lawsuit also highlights the environmental harm caused by silicone, the pacifier's main material. Silicone is derived from silica sand, which requires environmentally damaging mining, the lawsuit states.

Additionally, silicone is not biodegradable and can persist in the environment for hundreds of years. The plaintiffs argue that these facts contradict NUK's claims of sustainability, as the manufacturing and disposal of the pacifier are far from eco-friendly.

The pacifier’s recommended two-month lifespan raises further concerns, the plaintiffs say. A product marketed as sustainable should last longer to reduce waste, but NUK's pacifiers are meant to be disposed of after short use, contributing to environmental degradation.

Consumers Demand Truth in Green Marketing

The lawsuit comes at a time when consumers are increasingly seeking environmentally conscious products. Research shows that many consumers are willing to pay more for items marketed as sustainable, but the plaintiffs argue that they were misled by NUK's overstated claims – known as “greenwashing.” 

“Defendants are greenwashing offenders,” the plaintiffs say. As a result, they are looking to represent anyone in the United States who purchased any of the NUK branded “For Nature 100% Sustainable Silicone” pacifiers. 

They are suing for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and violations of state consumer laws. The lawsuit seeks certification of the class action, damages, fees, costs and a jury trial.

In May, California mom Roz Saedi filed a class action lawsuit against Coterie Baby, a popular eco-friendly diaper company alleging the company falsely advertised its diapers as "PFAS-free" despite containing the potentially harmful chemicals.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Kouyate et al. v. Nuk USA LLC, et al.
• Case Number: 1:24-cv-04020-AT
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division 

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• MaryBeth V. Gibson (Gibson Consumer Law Group LLC)            
• Brian C. Gudmundson, Rachel K. Tack, Benjamin R. Cooper (Zimmerman Reed LLP)                                

Have you bought products that claim to be "sustainable" or "eco-friendly" only to find out they weren't? Share your thoughts and experiences in the comments below.