Boppy Newborn Lounger Class Action Dismissal Affirmed on Appeal

Boppy Co. escaped claims that it misled millions of Americans into believing the company’s newborn lounger pillows were safe after a federal appeals court affirmed Tuesday that the lead plaintiff lacked standing to sue.

Jowanna Hudson, who filed a proposed class action following a national recall of the lounger in 2021, failed to show a connection between her purchase of the pillow in 2018 and the Boppy statements she found misleading, the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held in an unpublished decision.

Hudson used these statements to allege the company failed to produce a safe product as they promised. But the statements she alleged were on Boppy’s website weren’t published until 2021—after her 2018 purchase of the product, the court said.

“Hudson has failed to allege any connection whatsoever between her 2018 in-store purchase of the newborn lounger and the four Boppy statements later published online on Boppy’s website. She was not misled by any advertisements, statements, or warranties that she was not aware of at the time of the purchase,” Judge Richard E.N. Federico wrote for the court.

According to the court, Boppy issued the nationwide recall after eight infant deaths were related to use of the lounger pillows. Hudson, who purchased the lounger in 2018 without incident, alleged breach of express and implied warranties and unjust enrichment on behalf of a proposed consumer class.

The US District Court for the District of Colorado dismissed the suit for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

Hudson appealed, arguing that Boppy’s standing argument is new and creates a separate issue that she didn’t argue in an attempt to toss her claims.

The Tenth Circuit said it was reluctant to reverse the district court on an issue it didn’t rule on, but noted the district court touched on whether Hudson’s alleged injury could be traced to Boppy’s statements when determining whether she was injured at all.

Further, standing is a jurisdictional issue that can’t be waived, and so the appeals court would have to address the traceability element of standing anyway, it said.

Judges Gregory Phillips and Veronica Rossman joined the opinion.

Hudson is represented by Poulin Willey Anastopoulo LLC. Boppy is represented by Dentons US LLP.

The case is Hudson v. The Boppy Co., LLC, 10th Cir., No. 24-1322, unpublished 7/1/25.