Millie Moon diapers rash and leak lawsuits (McGee v. Zuru, Ornelas v. Zuru)

Two proposed class actions say Millie Moon Luxury Diapers leak and can cause severe rashes, blistering, peeling, bleeding and burn-like injuries on babies, while the packaging promises "12 HOUR ABSORBENCY" and calls the diapers "DERMATOLOGICALLY TESTED."

Two Riverside, California mothers filed the first case on October 1, 2026, in federal court in California. An Illinois father filed a second case on October 22, 2026, in federal court in Chicago. Both target ZURU LLC and ZURU Consumer Brands LLC, the companies behind Millie Moon, and both propose to cover buyers nationwide.

Millie Moon says testing has found no product-related cause and that no recall is warranted. Consumer Reports has told parents to stop using the diapers and called for a recall. There is no settlement, payment or claim form. This page explains the cases and what parents can do now.

Nitaya McGee and Miriam Carranza are the plaintiffs in the California case. The complaint says McGee bought size 4 diapers at Target stores in Riverside and Moreno Valley around May 2026, and both of her twins developed rashes and skin irritation that went away after she stopped using them. Carranza bought size 5 diapers several times at a Riverside Target, most recently around March 2026, for her daughter.

Noah Ornelas is the plaintiff in the Illinois case. He says he bought the diapers for his children, according to a ClaimDepot summary of his complaint.

ZURU LLC is an Oregon company based in El Segundo, California, named on the packaging as the distributor. ZURU Consumer Brands LLC is a Delaware company. Both market and sell the diapers nationwide, according to the California complaint.

The cases are McGee v. ZURU Consumer Brands LLC, No. 5:26-cv-05823, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, filed by Treehouse Law, LLP, and Ornelas v. ZURU, LLC, No. 1:26-cv-13025, in the Northern District of Illinois before Judge Martha M. Pacold, filed by Laukaitis Law LLC.

According to the California complaint:

• Millie Moon diapers in every size carry the same claims, including "12 HOUR ABSORBENCY," "DOUBLE LEAK GUARD," "DERMATOLOGICALLY TESTED" and "pH BALANCE LINER," along with Dermatest and OEKO-TEX STANDARD 100 marks.
• Since at least January 2026, Target.com reviewers have described leaks and skin injuries, and Millie Moon replied to many of them by pointing to its certifications.
• Consumer Product Safety Commission database entries describing skin reactions go back to at least September 2025.
• On September 22, 2026, WCPO reported that more than 375 of 385 complaints about Millie Moon in the federal database had come in during the prior six months.

The Illinois complaint cites 584 reports mentioning Millie Moon on SaferProducts.gov, with a surge in March 2026, according to ClaimDepot. Consumer Reports said on October 16, 2026, that more than 600 incidents had been reported this year, including at least three emergency room visits.

The plaintiffs say Zuru knew about the complaints but kept selling the diapers under the same promises without warning parents. They say they paid a premium for diapers that did not work as advertised and would have paid less or bought something else.

Millie Moon told WCPO that there has been "no change to the formulation, materials or suppliers," and that a recent outer-layer update was "visual only." It said its testing found "no evidence of contamination, manufacturing defects, or product performance issues" and no issue "that would warrant a recall." The company told Consumer Reports that six independent labs found no product-related cause and that "Diaper rash is common in infancy and can have a range of causes." It told USA TODAY complaints are under 0.1% of diapers sold.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission told WCPO it is "very aware of the many reports" but cannot comment on any active or potential investigation.

Neither court has decided anything. No judge has ruled that the diapers are defective, that the labels mislead or that a class can be certified. Class Action Pulse found no response from Zuru in either court as of November 3, 2026.

The California complaint proposes three groups:

• Nationwide class: All people who bought the diapers in the United States within the limitations period.
• California class: All people who bought them in California.
• California consumer subclass: California buyers for personal, family or household use.

The Illinois case also proposes a nationwide class of buyers, with its consumer fraud claim limited to Illinois buyers. You do not need an injury to fit the proposed purchase classes. None has been certified, and the definitions can change.

1. Watch your baby's skin. Consumer Reports advises stopping use and calling your pediatrician if you suspect a reaction.
2. Keep the package. Photograph the size, batch or lot code and the label claims.
3. Save proof of purchase, such as Target receipts, store app history or order emails.
4. Document any reaction with dated photos and medical records.
5. Report it to Millie Moon at hello@mymilliemoon.com and to the CPSC at SaferProducts.gov.

Nothing is available now. The California case seeks damages, restitution, punitive damages and an order stopping the challenged labels. The Illinois case also asks for a recall and better product testing, according to ClaimDepot. These cases focus on the purchase price. A child's injury may raise separate personal injury questions that a lawyer can explain. Any money would need a court win or a court-approved settlement.

• September 2025: Earliest skin-reaction reports in the federal database cited by the California complaint.
• February 2026: Millie Moon's printed-design change rolled out, according to Consumer Reports.
• September 22, 2026: Millie Moon says no recall is warranted.
• October 1, 2026: California case filed.
• October 16 and 22, 2026: Consumer Reports reports over 600 incidents, then advises parents to stop using the diapers.
• October 22, 2026: Illinois case filed.

You do not need to do anything to stay in a proposed class. Notice would explain any opt-out rights.

• Express warranty: A promise on a label, such as "12 HOUR ABSORBENCY," that the product must live up to.
• Implied warranty of merchantability: The legal expectation that a product works for its ordinary purpose.
• Price premium: The extra amount buyers say they paid because of the claims.
• SaferProducts.gov: The CPSC's public database of consumer-submitted safety reports.
• OEKO-TEX STANDARD 100: A textile certification that tests for certain harmful substances.

Zuru will likely answer or move to dismiss in both courts. If more cases are filed, courts may be asked to coordinate them. Separately, any recall would come from Millie Moon or federal regulators, not these lawsuits. Class Action Pulse will update this page as the dockets move.

This page relies on the filed California complaint and its docket, the Illinois docket, Millie Moon's statements to WCPO, Consumer Reports and USA TODAY, and Consumer Reports' review of federal data. The Illinois complaint itself was not reviewed; its details come from ClaimDepot. Incident reports are unverified consumer submissions and do not prove a cause. The California complaint's header shows an October 1 filing, while its signature block is dated October 10; this page uses the court's filing date.

Class Action Pulse is not a law firm or settlement administrator and does not guarantee eligibility or payment. This article is general information, not legal advice.