Judge Cathy Seibel
In 2008 experienced bakery worker Frazer used a mixing machine, made by ITW in 1988 or 1989. Her finger was hurt—and later amputated—after being struck by the mixer’s agitator. She admitted knowing how to operate the mixer and not to put her hand near the mixing bowl until the mixer fully stopped. In granting ITW judgment in Frazer’s action asserting design defect and failure to warn, the court excluded testimony by expert engineer Wilder, who found the mixer defectively designed because it lacked an interlock bowl guard when made. Wilder’s opinion was inadmissible under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm. Regulations Wilder cited did not support his finding that the mixer was defectively designed. Nor did he address how a guard might affect ITW’s compliance with the National Sanitation Foundation’s requirement that a machine be easily cleaned. Wilder also provided no foundational facts or methodology for his conclusions that an interlock guard would have been feasible. In finding that Frazer failed to show ITW had a duty to warn, the court noted that a manufacturer need not provide warnings to a user who is aware of the hazards that exist when using a certain product. The court also found the risk of injury open and obvious.
