UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
`
`FERNANDO ARMENDARIZ AND MIRIAM
`TREBINO, H/W
`100 West Tree Farm Drive
`Lytle, Texas 78052
`
`And
`
`MATTHEW BREEDON AND LINDSEY
`BROOKE MIXON, H/W
`6809 Sandnettles Dr.
`Savannah, Georgia 31410
`
`And
`
`ZACHARY BROWN
`314 Sharon Turnpike
`Goshen, Connecticut 06756
`
`And
`
`CATHERINE CHARGUALAF AND JUAN
`SAN NICOLAS CHARGUALAF, W/H
`7816 Haydenberry Cove
`Bellevue, Tennessee 37221
`
`And
`
`WILLIAM CLEGG AND JADA BRAY, H/W
`9065 South Iron Stob Road
`Atoka, Oklahoma 74525
`
`And
`
`DIONICIO DELGADO AND DIANA
`DELGADO, H/W
`23235 Richmond Turnpike
`Ruther Glen, Virginia 22546
`
`And
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 1 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`MARY DOFFENY AND JOSEPH
`DOFFENY, W/H
`199 Dunleith Drive
`Destrehan, Louisiana 70047
`
`And
`
`DAVID DUFF
`13345 Antonio Way
`Dade City, Florida 33525
`
`And
`
`JUAN DURAN
`401 Rayburn Street
`Leviland, Texas 79336
`
`And
`
`KYLA ELLIS AND CLAYTON ELLIS, W/H
`281 South Orleans Road
`Orleans, Massachusetts 02653
`
`And
`
`JAMES GARTH JR.
`107 Oak Grove Lane, Apt 2005
`Eatonton, Georgia 31024
`
`And
`
`JOSEPH HALASE AND LYNN MARIE
`HALASE, H/W
`7905 White Tail Drive
`Mt. Pleasant, Wisconsin 53406
`
`And
`
`AMY HENDEL
`18612 Irvine Trail
`Lakeville, Minnesota 55044
`
`And
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 2 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`NATHAN HENYAN AND AMBER
`HENYAN, H/W
`105 North 89th Avenue
`Yakima, Washington 98908
`
`And
`
`DWIGHT JACKSON AND MICHAELA-
`KELLY JACKSON, H/W
`6028 Golfview Crossing
`Locust Grove, Georgia 30248
`
`And
`
`ADAM MARITATO AND LAURA LYNN
`MARITATO H/W
`W210N16530 Woodshire Court
`Jackson, Wisconsin 53037
`
`And
`
`MICHAEL PARKER
`3290 72nd Street
`Saint Petersburg, Florida 33702
`
`And
`
`ROBERT PARKS AND MICHELLE
`PARKS, H/W
`126 South Tower Drive
`Port Washington, Wisconsin 53074
`
`And
`
`JAMES SCOPPA AND LEAH MICHELLE
`SCOPPA H/W
`37 Gallant Fox Lane
`Egg Harbor Township, New Jersey 08234
`
`And
`
`JERRY WYCHE
`621 Totty Way
`Lake Alfred, Florida 33850
`
`Plaintiffs,
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 3 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
` v.
`
`SIG SAUER, INC.
`72 Pease Boulevard
`Newington, N ew Hampshire 03801
`
` Defendant.
`
`COMPLAINT – CIVIL ACTION
`PARTIES
`1. The Plaintiffs in this action are a group of highly trained and experienced firearms
`users whose lives were upended by a dangerously defective pistol: the Sig Sauer P320.
`2. Upon the information discovered through research and document production, the
`Sig Sauer P320 is the most dangerous pistol for its users sold in the United States market.
`3. The Plaintiffs in this action are federal law enforcement agents, police officers,
`combat veterans, detectives, firearms instructors, and civilians who have dedicated significant
`portions of their lives to the safe use of weapons.
`4. The Plaintiffs in this action trusted Sig Sauer to live up to its reputation as a designer
`and manufacturer of safe and reliable handguns.
`5. The Plaintiffs in this action trusted Sig Sauer to live up to its promise that the P320
`“would not fire unless you want it to.”
`6. The Plaintiffs in this action were lied to and let down by Sig Sauer, falling victim
`to the dangerously designed and manufactured P320.
`7. Plaintiff, Fernando Armendariz (“Plaintiff” or “Armendariz”) is an adult
`individual, citizen, and resident of the State of Texas, residing at the above-captioned address.
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 4 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`8. Plaintiff, Miriam Trebino (“Plaintiff” or “Trebino”) is the wife of Armendariz, is a
`citizen, and resident of the State of Texas, residing at the above -captioned address, and makes
`claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`9. Plaintiff, Matthew Breedon (“Plaintiff” or “Breedon”), is an adult individual,
`citizen, and resident of the State of Georgia, residing at the above-captioned address.
`10. Plaintiff, Lindsey Brooke Mixon ( “Plaintiff” or “Mixon”) is the wife of Breedon,
`is an adult individual, citizen, and resident of the State of Georgia, residing at the above-captioned
`address, and makes claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`11. Plaintiff, Zachary Brown (“Plaintiff” or “Brown”), is an adult individual, citizen,
`and resident of the State of Connecticut, residing at the above-captioned address.
`12. Plaintiff, Catherine Chargualaf (“Plaintiff” or “Chargualaf”), is an adult individual,
`citizen, and resident of the State of Tennessee, residing at the above-captioned address.
`13. Plaintiff, Juan San Nicholas Chargualaf ( “Plaintiff” or “ Juan Chargualaf”) is the
`husband of Chargualaf, is an a dult individual, citizen, and resident of the State of Tennessee,
`residing at the above -captioned address, and makes claims of loss of consortium as described
`herein.
`14. Plaintiff, William Clegg (“Plaintiff” or “Clegg”) is an adult individual, citizen, and
`resident of the State of Oklahoma, residing at the above-captioned address.
`15. Plaintiff, Jada Bray (“Plaintiff” or “Bray”) is the wife of Clegg, an adult individual,
`citizen, and resident of the State of Oklahoma, residing at the above-captioned address, and makes
`claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`16. Plaintiff, Dion icio Delgado (“Plaintiff” or “Delgado”), is an adult individual,
`citizen, and resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia, residing at the above-captioned address.
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 5 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`17. Plaintiff, Diana Delgado (“Plaintiff” or “ Diana Delgado”) is the wife of Delgado,
`is an adult individual, citizen, and resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia, residing at the above-
`captioned address, and makes claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`18. Plaintiff, Mary Doffeny (“Plaintiff” or “Doffeny”), is an adult individual, citizen,
`and resident of the State of Louisiana, residing at the above-captioned address.
`19. Plaintiff, Joseph Doffeny ( “Plaintiff” or “Joseph Doffeny”), is the husband of
`Doffeny, an adult individual, citizen, and resident of the State of Louisiana, residing at the above-
`captioned address, and makes claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`20. Plaintiff, David Duff (“Plaintiff” or “Duff”), is an adult individual, citizen, and
`resident of the State of Florida, residing at the above-captioned address.
`21. Plaintiff, Juan Duran (“Plaintiff” or “Duran”), is an adult individual, citizen, and
`resident of the State of Texas, residing at the above-captioned address.
`22. Plaintiff, Kyla Ellis (“Plaintiff” or “Ellis”), is an adult individual, citizen, and
`resident of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, residing at the above-captioned address.
`23. Plaintiff, Clayton Ellis (“Plaintiff” or “Clayton Ellis”), is the husband of Ellis, is an
`adult individual, citizen, and resident of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, residing at the
`above-captioned address, and makes claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`24. Plaintiff, James Garth Jr. (“Plaintiff” or “Garth”), is an adult individual, citizen, and
`resident of the State of Georgia, residing at the above-captioned address.
`25. Plaintiff, Joseph Halase (“Plaintiff” or “Halase”), is an adult individual, citizen, and
`resident of the State of Wisconsin, residing at the above-captioned address.
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 6 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`26. Plaintiff, Lynn Marie Halase (“Plaintiff” or “Lynn Marie Halase”), is an adult
`individual, citizen, and resident of the State of Wisconsin, residing at the above-captioned address
`and makes claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`27. Plaintiff, Amy Hendel (“Plaintiff” or “Hendel”), is an adult individual, citizen, and
`resident of the State of Minnesota, residing at the above-captioned address.
`28. Plaintiff, Nathan Henyan (“Plaintiff” or “Henyan”), is an adult individual, citize n,
`and resident of the State of Washington, residing at the above-captioned address.
`29. Plaintiff, Amber Henyan (“Plaintiff” or “Amber Henyan”), is the wife of Henyan,
`an adult individual, citizen, and resident of the State of Washington, residing at the above -
`captioned address, and makes claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`30. Plaintiff, Dwight Jackson (“Plaintiff” or “Jackson”), is an adult individual, citizen,
`and resident of the State of Georgia, residing at the above-captioned address.
`31. Plaintiff, Michaela-Kelly Jackson (“Plaintiff” or “ Michaela Jackson”), is the wife
`of Jackson, an adult individual, citizen, and resident of the State of Georgia, residing at the above-
`captioned address, and makes claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`32. Plaintiff, Adam Maritato (“Plaintiff” or “Maritato”), is an adult individual, citizen,
`and resident of the State of Wisconsin, residing at the above-captioned address.
`33. Plaintiff, Laura Lynn Maritato (“Plaintiff” or “ Laura Maritato”), is the wife of
`Maritato, an adult individual, citizen, and resident of the State of Wisconsin, residing at the above-
`captioned address, and makes claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`34. Plaintiff, Michael Parker (“Plaintiff” or “Parker”), is an adult individual, citizen,
`and resident of the State of Florida, residing at the above-captioned address.
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 7 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`35. Plaintiff, Robert Parks (“Plaintiff” or “Parks”), is an adult individual, citizen, and
`resident of the State of Wisconsin, residing at the above-captioned address.
`36. Plaintiff, Michelle Parks (“Plaintiff” or “Michelle Parks”), is the wife of Parks , is
`an adult individual, citizen, and resident of the State of Wisconsin, residing at the above-captioned
`address, and makes claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`37. Plaintiff, James Scoppa (“Plaintiff” or “ Scoppa”), is an adult individual, citizen,
`and resident of the State of New Jersey, residing at the above captioned address.
`38. Plaintiff, Leah Michelle Scoppa (“Plaintiff” or “Leah Scoppa”), is the wife of
`Scoppa, is an adult individual, citizen, and resident of the State of New Jersey, residing at the
`above captioned address, and makes claims of loss of consortium as described herein.
`39. Plaintiff, Jerry Wyche (“Plaintiff” or “Wyche”), is an adult individual, citizen, and
`resident of the State of Florida, residing at the above captioned address.
`40. Defendant, Sig Sauer, Inc. (“Sig Sauer” or “Sig Sauer”) is a corporation or other
`business entity with its principal place of business at 72 Pease Boulevard in Newington, New
`Hampshire 03801, organized and incorporated under the laws of Delaware.
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`41. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. There is
`perfect diversity of citizenship between the parties. The defendant is a resident of the state of New
`Hampshire. Each plaintiff resides in a state other than New Hampshire. The court may exercise
`personal jurisdiction over the defendant because it is a resident to New Hampshire.
`42. Venue is proper because a substantial part of the acts and omissions giving rise to
`this action occurred in New Hampshire.
`
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 8 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
`43. Sig Sauer designs and manufactures firearms for sale to military and commercial
`markets throughout the United States and internationally. It markets and sells its products directly
`and through dealers.
`44. Sig Sauer was formerly known as SIG SAUERARMS Inc. and changed its name
`to Sig Sauer, Inc. in October 2007. Its Chief Executive Officer at all times relevant to this
`Complaint was Ron J. Cohen.
`45. The Sig Sauer P320 is susceptible to unintended discharges, meaning instances
`when a gun fires without user intent, at an alarmingly high rate.
`46. There have been over 100 incidents (and likely multiples more) of the Sig Sauer
`unintentionally discharging when the user believed they did not pull the trigger, many of which
`have caused severe injury to the users and/or bystanders.
`47. The vast majority of these users are law enforcement officers, former military
`personnel, and/or trained and certified gun owners.
`48. At all relevant times, Sig Sauer was acting by and through its employees, servants,
`and agents, acting within the course and scope of their employment, service and agency.
`49. This action seeks actual, compensatory, and enhanced compensatory damages, and
`equitable relief, relating to Defendant, Sig Sauer Inc.’s (hereinafter “Defendant” or “Sig Sauer”),
`negligence, defective design, and unfair and deceptive marketing practices regarding a firearm.
`50. Specifically, this matter involves a striker-fired pistol known as the “P320” that has
`fired without the trigger being pulled or deliberately actuated by the user, on numerous civilians
`and law enforcement agents across the nation.
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 9 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`51. Prior to the incidents detailed below in this Complaint, Sig Sauer received multiple
`complaints and notifications of P320 pistols firing when the trigger was either not pulled, or not
`deliberately actuated by the user.
`52. In its “Safety Without Compromise” marketing materials for the P320, Sig Sauer
`promises:
`
`53. Despite this express representation, which Sig Sauer has made for the last several
`years to the present, the weapon lacks industry- standard safety features and has fired without the
`user deliberately pulling the trigger many, many times.
`54. Defendant, Sig Sauer, had knowledge long before the sales of the P320s used by
`Plaintiffs that the P320 - its first ever striker-fired pistol - was capable of firing unintentionally due
`to defective components and/or the lack of necessary safety features, including but not limited to:
`a manual safety, a tabbed trigger safety, a de-cocker, a hinged trigger, and/or a grip safety.
`55. For many years since the weapon was first introduced to the market in 2014, Sig
`Sauer has wantonly failed to recall the P320 despite knowing of scores of grievous wounds
`inflicted upon users and bystanders.
`56. Years before the incident occurred, through and including the date of Plaintiffs
`incidents, which span from February 15, 2020 to October 3, 2022, Sig Sauer expressly represented
`that the weapon could not fire without a trigger pull: “[w]e’ve designed safety elements into every
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 10 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`necessary feature on this pistol. From the trigger, to the striker and even the magazine, the P320
`won’t fire unless you want it to”:
`
`57. In additional marketing material, under the heading “Striker Safety,” Sig Sauer
`further states: the striker safety “[p]revents the striker from being released unless the trigger is
`pulled.”
`58. At the same time, Sig Sauer contradictorily stated in the original owner’s manual
`for the P320, which warns on page 25, that the weapon could fire if dropped without the trigger
`being pulled if a round were “chambered,” i.e., inside the firing chamber of the weapon’s slide.
`59. It is standard operating procedure for many U.S. law enforcement agencies, local
`police departments, and the military, at a commander’s discretion, as well as customary for many
`private owners, to carry pistols with a chambered round.
`60. Sig Sauer advertises that users can carry the P320 with a round chambered by
`annotating the P320’s capacity in various configurations as “10 + 1,” “12 + 1,” etc.
`61. The “+ 1” represents a chambered round.
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 11 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`62. Sig Sauer was aware of the latter fact at the time it designed and manufactured all
`its pistols, including the P320. The P320 is the first striker-fired pistol1 it has ever manufactured.
`63. Sig Sauer assembled the P320 using the same frame from an earlier hammer-fired
`Sig Sauer model, the P250.
`64. While competing for a $580 million contract to supply the United States Army
`with a new service pistol in 2016, Sig Sauer’s prototype P320s exhibited nearly 200 malfunctions
`during Army testing. The Army demanded that Sig Sauer fix all problems associated with the
`prototype.
`65. The Unites States Army only agreed to the purchase of the P320 after Sig Sauer
`committed to designing an external manual safety for every military gun sold.
`
`1 A striker-fired pistol is different from the traditional “hammer -fired” pistol. It contains no external hammer to be
`pulled back by the user; rather, it has an internal “striker” that is held back under spring pressure inside the gun, like
`a bow and arrow. The P320 is designed so that the rearward movement of the slide places the striker under significant
`spring tension, making it ready to fire once it is released. The striker is held back by the weapon’s sear. In the below
`illustrative photo of a typical striker-fired pistol the striker, in red, is held back by the sear, in blue.
`
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 12 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`66. Of the nearly 20 models of non- military P320s, only 1 model offers a manual
`external safety as an “option.”
`67. Sig Sauer’s custom-design program allows for hundreds of thousands of different
`configurations of the P320, but does not allow users to add any type of external safety.
`68. An external manual safety, at the time the subject gun was sold, wa s certainly
`technologically feasible for the P320.
`69. A properly functioning and active external manual safety, at the time the subject
`gun was sold, would preclude a properly functioning P320 from firing in an unintended fashion.
`70. Upon information and belief, every striker-fired pistol on the market is equipped
`with some type of manual safety; whether it is a thumb safety, tab trigger safety, grip safety, de -
`cocker, or hinge trigger.
`71. Upon information and belief, Sig Sauer manufactures the only striker-fired pistols
`on the market that are not equipped with any form of external manual safety.
`72. Upon information and belief, every single-action pistol on the market is equipped
`with some type of manual safety; whether it is a thumb safety, tab trigger safety, grip safety, de -
`cocker, or hinge trigger.
`73. Upon information and belief, Sig Sauer manufactures the only single -action
`pistols on the market that are not equipped with any form of external manual safety.
`74. Sometime after January 2017, when a Connecticut law enforcement agent was
`shot by a P320 that fell to the ground from less than three feet, Sig Sauer removed the warning on
`page 25 from the user manual regarding a chambered round, and replaced it with the following
`language:
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 13 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`(emphasis in original).
`75. Defendant, Sig Sauer had never before represented that mere “vibration” could
`cause the weapon to discharge.
`76. Upon information and belief, no other firearms manufacturer has ever made such
`a representation.
`77. Sig Sauer acknowledges in its own manuals that vibrations can cause its safety
`mechanisms to fail to work as designed.
`78. Since the P320’s manufacture and distribution into the stream of commerce, Sig
`Sauer has expressly represented that the weapon possessed a “robust safety system”:
`
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 14 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`79. Despite their representations, Sig Sauer never made a tabbed trigger safety
`available as an option for the P320.2
`80. In fact, Sig Sa uer’s original design and manufacture of the P320 rendered the
`weapon unreasonably dangerous for its intended uses and for any foreseeable uses, including
`normal carrying, holstering, un-holstering, and/or handling.
`81. When Sig Sauer shipped P320s to dealers for sale to civilian consumers, Sig Sauer
`knew or should have known that the weapon was defective in its design and unreasonably
`dangerous for its ordinary uses, intended uses, and all other foreseeable uses and that un-
`commanded discharges could occur in the ordinary course of using the weapon.
`82. Before Plaintiffs purchased their pistols, Sig Sauer was aware of other, prior un-
`commanded discharges of the P320 platform, and other Sig Sauer pistols, many of which pre-dated
`their purchases.
`83. In 2015, a Pennsyl vania State Trooper and firearms instructor killed another
`trooper with his Sig Sauer pistol when it discharged without a trigger pull while conducting safety
`training.
`84. In 2016, a tactical response training instructor near Sacramento dropped his Sig
`Sauer, firing a bullet into a student’s truck.
`85. In the period between 2012 and 2015, the New York City Police Department
`reported 10 un-commanded discharges involving Sig Sauer weapons.
`86. In February 2016, a fully-holstered P320 discharged without a trigger pull inside
`a Roscommon, Michigan Police Officer’s vehicle when the officer moved to exit the vehicle during
`a snowstorm. The incident was captured on the Officer’s body-worn camera.
`
`2 A tabbed-trigger safety is a small tab within the trigger which must be depressed in order for
`the entire trigger to be depressed; thus preventing incidental discharges.
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 15 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`87. In 2016, the Surprise, Arizona Police Department complained to Sig Sauer of two
`separate incidents of P320s firing without trigger pulls.
`88. In October 2016, a P320 fired un-commanded on retired NYPD Officer Thomas
`Frankenberry in South Carolina, severely injuring him. The spent casing did not eject.
`89. In November 2016, a P320 fired un-commanded on an Officer in Holmes Beach
`Florida, striking him in his leg.
`90. In 2017, a Sheriff’s Deputy in Michigan’s Sig Sauer pistol discharged without a
`trigger pull, striking a schoolteacher in the neck.
`91. On January 5, 2017, a P320 shot a Stamford, Connecticut SWAT team member
`in his left knee when the pistol fell from a distance of less than three feet to the ground while fully
`holstered, refuting SIG SAUER’s express representations that the weapon is drop safe, cannot fire
`without a trigger pull and does not require a safety to be drop safe.
`92. On February 28, 2017, a P320 discharged without a trigger pull while in use by
`the University of Cincinnati Police Department.
`93. On June 14, 2017, a P320 discharged without a trigger pull in Wilsonville,
`Oregon.
`94. On June 20, 2017, a P320 discharged without a trigger pull while in use by the
`Howell Township, New Jersey Police Department.
`95. In June of 2017, Sig Sauer shipped approximately 800 P320s to the Loudoun
`County Sheriff’s Department, privately assuring its leadership, Sheriff David Chapman that the
`problems with the weapon would be fixed, but that for the time being it had to deal with the weapon
`as currently manufactured and designed.
`3
`
`3 As noted infra, both a non-upgraded and “upgraded” version of these P320s later fired
`un-commanded on and hit at least two Loudoun County deputy sheriffs in 2018 and 2019.
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 16 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`96. On July 28, 2017, a P320 discharged without a trigger pull in Tarrant County,
`Texas.
`97. On August 4, 2017, the Stamford SWAT team member sued Sig Sauer in U.S.
`District Court in Connecticut for an un-commanded discharge of a commercial version of the P320
`that shot him in his knee.
`98. Four days later, Sig Sauer’s CEO released a statement stating: “there have been
`zero (0) reported drop-related P320 incidents in the U.S. Commercial market.”
`99. This statement was false, in view of Sig Sauer’s knowledge that Officer Sherperis
`in Connecticut had been shot by a drop fire some eight months earlier with the commercial version
`of the P320, and that several other un-commanded discharges of the P320 had occurred before that
`date.
`100. On August 8, 2017, Sig Sauer announced a “voluntary upgrade” program for the
`P320 pistol, stating tha t the pistol meets “rigorous testing protocols for global military and law
`enforcement agencies” and all “U.S. standard for safety.”
`101. This statement was also false, as there are no federal government standards for
`gun safety, a fact known to Sig Sauer when it issued this press release.
`102. No federal agency oversees how firearms are designed or built. Firearms were
`expressly exempted by Congress from any federal regulation when it created the Consumer
`Product Safety Commission in 1972.
`103. Sig Sauer’s “upgrade” p rogram, which was presented to the public as purely
`optional, not urgent, and not mandatory, offered to mark existing commercial versions of the P320
`“better” by installing a much lighter trigger, and internal disconnect switch, an improved sear to
`prevent un-commanded discharges.
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 17 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`104. On August 9, 2017, the Police Chief of Morrow, Georgia issued and emergency
`order removing the P320 from service.
`105. In October 2017, a P320 discharged without a trigger pull in Georgia when an
`officer fell to the ground in pursuit of a suspect. His weapon was holstered and fired simply when
`he struck the ground.
`106. On November 12, 2017, a P320 discharged without a trigger pull in Dallas
`County, Texas.
`107. On February 2, 2018, Tyler Herman of McCloud, Oklahoma was removing a
`holster containing his P320 from his belt. While in the process of removing the holster, and without
`him touching the trigger, Herman’s P320 discharged, striking Herman and causing catastrophic
`injuries.
`108. On February 7, 2018, Loudoun County, Virginia Deputy Sheriff Ma rcie
`Vadnais’s P320 fired on her un- commanded in Virginia, severing her right femur causing
`catastrophic skeletal injury, deformity, three general anesthesia surgeries, severe emotional
`distress, and related trauma, ending her career. Upon CAT scanning her P320, it was found to have
`both a design and manufacturing defect: crossed sear springs that apply upward spring pressure to
`the sear to keep it from releasing the striker.
`109. Months later in April 2018, Sig Sauer issued a second “voluntary upgrade” notice
`to all users or owners of the P320, but still did not recall the weapon.
`110. In May 2018, civilian Gunter Walker reported to Sig Sauer that his P320 fired on
`him un-commanded when he placed the weapon down on his nightstand, shooting him through the
`palm of his left hand.
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 18 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`19
`
`111. In June 2018, a Williams County, Ohio Officer reported that his P320 discharged
`twice in one moment as he was merely attempting to move the slide backward. One round grazed
`the Officer’s arm; the other blew through his patrol car’s driver’s side door.
`112. In May 2018, a Rancho Cucamonga, California Officer reported that his P320
`fired un-commanded merely while he was walking inside his department locker room; the casing
`of the round did not eject.
`113. In October 2018, a P320 fired un- commanded on Li eutenant Letrell Hayes in
`Georgia while he was holstering it, causing severe tunneling injuries to his right thigh and calf.
`114. In October 2018, retired Law Enforcement Officer Stephen Mayes’ P320 fired
`un-commanded while seated in its holster, causing severe injury to his right leg.
`115. In December 2018, civilian Robert Lang’s P320 fired on him un-commanded and
`caused serve tunneling wounds to this right leg.
`116. On May 19, 2019, the P320 of Lieutenant Thomas Ahern of the Cambridge,
`Massachusetts SWAT team fired u n-commanded inside a SWAT van with six other occupants
`while he was working a shift for the annual MayFair event near Harvard Square.
`117. The round struck a cellphone case on Ahern’s left leg, deflected into a SWAT
`gear bag and came to rest in a ballistic hel met, narrowly missing everyone else in the van. The
`casing of the round did not eject. Lieutenant Ahern is a Sig Sauer certified armorer4 on the P320.
`
`4 According to Sig Sauer documents, “[t]he SIG SAUER factory armorer certification enables the
`agency armorer or individual user to completely disassemble, inspect, service, and re -assemble
`associated weapon systems without voiding the factory warranty. Proper and routine w eapon
`maintenance and inspection of a firearm are essential to ensure maximum reliability. Factory
`armorer courses at SIG SAUER Academy certify agency armorers or individuals to maintain,
`inspect, service, and repair selected SIG SAUER firearms while preserving the factory warranty.
`Upon successful completion, armorers will fully understand each firearm and be factory-certified
`for a period of three years.” https://www.Sig Sauer saueracademy.com/course/armorer-
`certification
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 19 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`20
`
`118. On July 23, 2019, a P320 fired un- commanded on Officer Walter Collete, Jr. of
`the Somerville, Massachusetts Police Department hitting him in his leg and causing substantial
`injuries to his leg.
`119. In August 2019, a Philadelphia Transit Officer Craig Jacklyn’s P320 fired un-
`commanded while fully- holstered, nearly striking a bystander in the subway concourse. The
`incident was captured on video, and the officer was returned to duty the next day.
`120. The transit authority replaced all Sig Sauer P320s, and later fully exonerated the
`officer of any alleged wrongdoing in view of the content of the videotape of the incident showing
`that it fired without a trigger pull. The officer, Craig Jacklyn, later stated:
`This weapon is a hazard. I actually spoke with a lawyer for my situation. Although no one
`was hurt...someone could have been killed. I'm angry that I was put in a potentially life
`altering position with a product deemed "safe" by its manufacturer. The fact that officers
`are carrying this weapon on the job and at home around family thinking it's safe even while
`resting in its holster has me very angry. Everything that I've told you is documented through
`2 Investigative Services. Philadelphia Police Firearms Investigative Unit/ Officer Involved
`Shooting Incident Unit a nd SEPTA Transit Police Criminal Investigations Unit. There is
`station video footage/ body worn camera footage as well.
`
`121. On September 3, 2019, another P320 in use by the Loudoun County Virginia’s
`Sheriff’s Office fired un-commanded on another Loudoun County Deputy Sheriff, Carl Costello,
`hitting his leg.
`122. On October 10, 2019, Officer Jacques Desrosiers, also of the Cambridge,
`Massachusetts Police Department, was shot by his P320 without him pulling the trigger. The round
`caused massive and life-changing injuries to Officer Desrosiers. The spent casing of the round did
`not eject.
`123. On October 11, 2019, a P320 fired un- commanded on Veterans Affairs Police
`Officer Frank J. Kneski, striking him beneath his lower back as he was un-holstering the weapon.
`Upon inspection it was found that the spent casing did not eject.
`Case 1:22-cv-00536-JL-AJ Document 1 Filed 11/30/22 Page 20 of 143
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`21
`
`124. On November 9, 2019, a P320 fired un-commanded on Officer Matthew Gardette
`of the Manteca, California Police Department as he was getting ready for work. As he merely
`attempted to place and fasten his duty belt around his waist, the P320 discharged inside the holster.
`125. The holster was a Safariland level three retention holster with a hood securing the
`pistol. The round blew out the bottom of the holster, impacted the locker room floor, and missed
`both Officer Gardette and fellow officers by inches as it ricocheted into a locker door.
`126. On December 2, 2019, a P320 fired un- commanded while in the possession of
`Detective David Albert, also of the Cambridge, Massachusetts Police Department, as he was in
`the process of putting his duty belt on.
`127. Upon information and belief, employees at Sig Sauer’s own training academy in
`New Hampshire have admitted to un- commanded discharges causing injury in both 2016 and
`2017.
`128. On February 27, 2020, Tampa Police Department Reserve Office Howard
`Northrop was severely and permanently injured when his