Children’s clothing manufacturer and retailer, The Children’s Place, argues that plaintiff’s attorneys should be sanctioned for bringing a proposed PFAS class action, calling the case a “reckless” attack based on unreliable evidence.

The Children’s Place claims that before filing suit, plaintiff’s counsel tested two items of defendant’s clothing, one of which tested negative for PFAS. The other item tested positive for trace levels of PFAS, but the testing lab flagged the results as unreliable. The Children’s Place performed their own tests on the products, which were both negative for PFAS. Despite sharing these results with plaintiff, The Children’s Place states that plaintiff refused to dismiss the complaint.

The Children’s Place also filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), arguing plaintiff lacks standing to bring claims because she did not suffer any injury. The outcome of this sanctions motion (and the motion to dismiss) could help shape the way courts evaluate claims regarding products that may or may not contain PFAS.