State Farm is going after Amazon in a subrogation case over a fire allegedly sparked by a battery charger.
The insurer filed the action on March 3, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, naming Amazon.Com Services, Inc., SEIVI Tech No. 7, and MORNGC as defendants. State Farm is seeking to recover $308,420.31 it paid out to its insured after a fire allegedly caused by a rechargeable battery charger sold through Amazon's Fulfilled by Amazon program.
According to the filing, the insured purchased a SEIVI Rechargeable Batteries with Charger Compatible with Arlo Wireless Security Cameras from Amazon in June 2022. The product was listed under MORNGC but was stored, sold, and delivered by Amazon through its FBA program. About 18 months later, on or about December 21, 2023, the charger allegedly failed to shut off after the batteries reached full charge. What followed, according to the filing, was thermal runaway — the batteries overheated, exploded, and expelled their internal components, igniting nearby items and setting off the property's sprinkler system. The result was fire, smoke, and water damage to the insured's property in Pasadena.
A post-incident examination, conducted with the participation of experts and representatives of Amazon, allegedly showed the charger could not detect that the batteries were fully charged and did not cut power as it should have. The filing also alleges the product did not carry any warning or instructions about the risk of charger failure or battery explosion from overcharging. State Farm points to what it describes as numerous complaints and notices on the Amazon portal about problems with the product — and alleges the defendants were aware of those problems but continued selling it.
The case raises four causes of action: negligence in product design, negligence in manufacturing, and strict product liability on both design and manufacturing grounds. No trial date has been set, and no determination on the merits has been made.
For the insurance industry, the case touches on two issues worth watching. The first is Amazon's role in the product's distribution chain. Under the FBA model, Amazon stored, advertised, sold, and delivered the product, according to the filing. Whether that exposure makes the platform liable as a seller or distributor in product liability cases remains an unsettled question in courts across the country — and it has real consequences for insurers trying to recover subrogation dollars. The other defendants, SEIVI Tech No. 7 and MORNGC, are described in the filing only as business entities of unknown type, which could complicate recovery efforts.
The second issue is the rise in fire claims linked to rechargeable batteries. From e-bikes to security camera accessories, battery-related fires are showing up more frequently on property insurers' loss reports. This case fits squarely within that pattern.
