A lawsuit accusing Amazon of acting as the distributor of a dangerously defective heating pad has been quietly resolved, closing a case that centered on allegations of severe burn injuries and questions over responsibility for products sold by third-party vendors.

Court records show that Khadija Karim, a Pennsylvania woman who said she suffered serious burns from a heating pad purchased through Amazon, reached a confidential Amazon Heating Pad Settlement on Dec. 17. The agreement came just weeks before the case was set to go to trial.

The lawsuit had been filed earlier this year in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, naming Amazon.com as the sole defendant.

Alleged Burns From Overheating Device

Karim alleged she sustained second-degree burns after a heating pad sold on Amazon overheated during normal use and could not be removed from her body. Heating pads are widely marketed to relieve muscle pain and stiffness, but when they malfunction, they can pose serious risks, including burns, electric shock and fire.

According to the complaint, Karim purchased the heating pad through Amazon and first used it in April 2023. She said the product arrived without instructions or safety warnings. After allowing it to warm for several minutes, she fastened it around her abdomen using an attached buckle.

Soon afterward, Karim claimed the pad became dangerously hot. When she tried to remove it, the buckle allegedly failed, leaving the device strapped to her body as it continued to overheat.

Claims of Preventable Injuries

The lawsuit said Karim suffered painful second-degree burns that later became infected. She alleged the injuries could have been avoided if the product had incorporated basic safety features commonly found in similar devices, such as limits on heat output and a reliable quick-release mechanism.

The complaint described the incident as a design failure with foreseeable and severe consequences.

Amazon Named as Sole Defendant

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

As a result, the lawsuit named Amazon alone, accusing the company of importing and distributing a defective product from an unverified — and possibly fictitious — manufacturer. The complaint argued Amazon failed to properly vet third-party sellers and products before offering them to U.S. consumers.

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

Settlement Reached, Terms Sealed

On Dec. 17, both sides notified the court they had reached a settlement resolving all claims. Under the notice, each party agreed to cover its own legal fees and costs, and dismissal paperwork was being prepared in line with court procedures. The settlement terms were not disclosed publicly.

Broader Scrutiny of Amazon’s Role

The heating pad case is among a growing number of lawsuits challenging Amazon’s responsibility for injuries tied to defective products sold by third-party vendors on its platform.

In another lawsuit filed earlier in 2025, Amazon was named as a defendant in a pressure cooker explosion case involving a child who allegedly suffered severe scalding injuries when an Instant Pot purchased through Amazon opened while still pressurized. That case alleges Amazon allowed a dangerously defective product to be sold despite prior recalls and known issues with the cooker’s lid-locking system.

The suit was filed solely against Amazon after the manufacturer, Instant Brands Inc., sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection amid a wave of similar injury claims.

Amazon’s role in such disputes has drawn heightened attention 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 recalls of unsafe products. Amazon has consistently disputed that designation and continues to challenge liability for items sold by independent sellers.