Overview
- Plaintiffs Gregory Hoffert and Prashant Sharan sued Nintendo in April seeking refunds for U.S. purchases made during the tariff period, alleging unjust enrichment and violations of consumer-protection law.
- In filings on July 21 and 22, Nintendo asked the Western District of Washington to dismiss the suit, saying customers voluntarily paid advertised prices and are not entitled to rebates because the sales were completed.
- Nintendo told the court it did not simply pass tariff costs straight to buyers, saying it made selective, modest price changes and absorbed costs on some products including the Switch 2.
- The company has also moved to compel arbitration for at least one plaintiff, a procedural step that could limit class-wide relief if courts enforce Nintendo’s contracts.
- The central legal question — whether importers that sought tariff refunds must disgorge related proceeds to consumers — is unsettled and will be tested in this and more than 100 similar early-stage cases nationwide.