On September 21, 2023 Shimano, the world’s largest manufacturer of bicycle components, announced a voluntary product recall of their top-tier eleven-speed cranksets. On a bicycle, the cranks are the lever arms to which the pedals, crank axle and chainring(s) are attached. The recall applies to certain batches of cranksets, from the top two tiers of their road component sets. The issue? The cranks have a tendency to delaminate due to corrosion. According to a complaint filed in October 2023, this issue was described in a blog post as early as 2016. The same complaint cites Instagram account thanksshimano, which was created in 2017 to document and share images of these cranks failing.
In the wake of the recall announcement, two groups of plaintiffs filed suit alleging the recall is inadequate. On December 12, Judge James Selna ordered the two cases consolidated.
The crank failure
The suits arise over an alleged design flaw in two generations of Shimano’s top two tiers of road crankset, Dura-Ace and Ultegra. Most of Shimano’s road cranksets use their Hollowtech technology, in which the crank arms are formed from two u-shaped pieces of aluminum that are joined together. According to professional aerospace engineer and part-time YouTuber Arampamoorthy Sachinder Srikantha Sanjeevkumar Varaprasatham Hambinathan, who is better known as Hambini, lower tiers of cranks have these pieces welded together, but for the affected cranks, the halves are held together with adhesive, presumably to save weight.
Hambini, who is cited in the complaints, believes the failure arises from the fact that the aluminum crank arms are affixed to a steel spindle. When materials of different electropotential touch, and an electrolyte, such as water is present, corrosion occurs at an accelerated rate on the more vulnerable metal, in this case the aluminum. Another engineer and part-time YouTuber Peak Torque theorized that the start of the corrosion arises from water sticking in minor gaps between the chainrings, the front gears, and the cranks and/or atmospheric moisture remaining inside the shell from manufacturing.
This corrosion, Hambini and Peak Torque believe, leads to the adhesive failing. Then, with the twisting forces applied to the crank through pedaling, the cranks delaminate. The plaintiffs argue this fault poses a potentially fatal risk, though the crank-related injuries documented in the complaints are, in comparison, minor.
The Recall & Litigation
On September 21, 2023, a full two years after the release of the latest generation of Ultegra and Dura-Ace, Shimano announced a voluntary recall of the affected cranks. Individuals who own the affected cranks were instructed to take their bikes to their local Shimano dealer for a visual inspection paid for by Shimano. If the cranks are found to be faulty, the bike shop will send in the cranks for replacement. In the United States, Shimano will then send the bike shop an equivalent new old stock eleven speed Ultegra or Dura-Ace crankset, presumably from one of the unaffected production batches. The shop will then install the replacement cranks at Shimano’s expense.
However, the plaintiffs allege this recall is insufficient. First, they allege that bike shop mechanics are underqualified to test the cranks for delamination. Peak Torque similarly argues that a visual inspection might miss delamination below the surface. To truly determine the soundness of the cranks, he believes, bike shops would need to employ a CT scan, for example.
Second, the plaintiffs argue that the recall is inadequate because individuals who own bicycles with cranks not found to be faulty, will feel unsure about the safety of their cranks going forward. Presumably, they will be pedaling a ticking time bomb. However, in Shimano’s recall documents, they say customers can bring their cranks back in for a followup inspection.
Trek and Specialized’s involvement
The bicycle manufacturers Specialized and Trek are also named in the complaints for allegedly selling bicycles with cranks they knew or should have known were defective. Moreover, the plaintiffs argue these brands touted Shimano components as a selling point for their top-of-the-line bicycles.
The firms representing the plaintiffs
Jarret Hawkins, the lead plaintiff in the consolidated case is represented by Baron & Budd, Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman, and DiCello Levitt Gutzler. Baron & Budd has been the second most prolific of these, filing 1,500 new cases since 2019, 35% of which have surrounded product liability, which for the purposes of the following analyses is defined as suits with the Nature of Suit codes 365 and 245 for product liability and tort product liability. They have been heavily involved in a few different large multidistrict litigations in the last four years. They have represented municipalities in the MDL against 3M and others over per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Baron & Budd have also represented numerous school districts in the MDL against social media companies over the alleged negative consequences these platforms have had on teens and children. They are similarly representing school districts in the MDL against Juul over their allegedly predatory marketing practices and how it has supposedly led to teenage nicotine addictions. In medicine, Baron & Budd have represented plaintiffs in the ongoing MDL against primarily C.R. Bard and Cook Medical over inferior vena cava (IVC) filters allegedly causing harmful side effects; and they have represented plaintiffs in litigation against Johnson & Johnson over complications allegedly due to pelvic mesh implants.
While Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman (Millberg) has been more prolific in overall cases than Baron & Budd, they have handled a smaller percentage of product liability cases at 25% of total caseload. Millberg is also involved in the MDL against Juul, though they tend to represent individual plaintiffs rather than school districts. As to other MDLs they are representing plaintiffs in the MDL against Syngenta, Chevron, and others over whether the weed killer Paraquat causes Parkinson’s Disease, as well as the MDL over Roundup, an MDL over allegedly defective intrauterine devices (IUDs), and the MDL against 3M over allegedly defective ear plugs, which has been previously covered by Law Street. They have also represented plaintiffs in 25 cases regarding pressure cookers that can allegedly be opened while under pressure, which if true, would render explosive results.
DiCello Levitt Gutzler has handled far fewer cases since 2019 than the above two firms, though they seem to specialize about the same amount at 32% of total caseload. Of these cases, all but one are part of an MDL against cosmetics companies over their hair relaxers allegedly causing uterine cancer. The remaining case is part of the social media MDL.
The consolidated plaintiffs are represented by DiCello Levitt Gutzler, Dwoskin Wasdin, the Law Offices of Robert Loewy, and Larson LLP.
The Law Offices of Robert Loewy is by far the smallest firm representing the plaintiffs. They have not been involved in any notable federal product liability cases over the past four years, excepting Shaun Sater et al v. Chrysler Group LLC et al. In this case, the judge ruled that a recall that remedies the issues with a car barred a plaintiff from receiving benefit-of-the-bargain damages.
Larson, LLP has similarly been uninvolved in federal product liability litigation, excepting a case about a replacement elbow.
Dwoskin Wasdin has handled no other federal product liability cases since 2019.
The firms representing Shimano
Shimano is represented primarily by Munger, Tolles & Olson, who, since 2019 have represented defendants in 53% of their total cases. A relatively small, 2%, of their cases surround product liability issues. However, this is likely an undercount of their total workload as they are involved in two MDLs. First, they represent Snap Inc., the company who owns Snapchat, in the ongoing MDL against social media companies. Second, they are one of the firms representing Juul in the MDL over the company’s allegedly predatory marketing.
Judge James Selna
Born in San Jose, California, Judge Selna has spent his entire academic and legal career in California. After receiving his bachelor’s and J.D. from Stanford, he worked for O’Melveny & Myers before becoming a judge in California State Court. In 2003, he was appointed by George W. Bush to the Central District of California where he has served since. In the prevailing years, among other cases, he has presided on the panel for the MDL surrounding Toyota vehicles spontaneously accelerating.
Of particular relevance to this case, in 2023 he presided over A.S. et al v. SR Suntour North America, Inc. et al. In this case, a father sued Suntour, the maker of his child’s bicycle, because the downtube snapped leading to injuries. This case was settled out of court.
How the suit could end
Of the hundreds of cases included in these analyses, by far the most common outcome is an out-of-court settlement, often before a class is certified. Given the firms the plaintiffs have hired, who have extensive experience in class-action suits and MDLs, it seems likely they expect this case to head in such a direction. That said, it seems likely, based on the history of the firms involved, that whether a class is certified or not, this case will end in a settlement without a ruling on whether Shimano’s recall is inadequate.
