7DUALPLEX 360 REPORTThis statement NBD, Inc. has provided in the instruction manual is providing protection from lawsuits and denying all warranties for the faulty Dualplex 360 computers. NDB would argue contributory negligence attributed to the plaintiff(s) on the grounds that it was their responsibility to read and adhere to warnings and notes printed in the instruction manual. NBD would also argue misuse of a product because the warning in the instruction manual tells the usernot to leave it plugged in after its fully charged. When the warning is adhered to, then the device will not overheat and catch fire and it will work as its designed to. Had the plaintiff(s) failed to do so, then they were not using the product as it was intended. Some customers have admitted that they ignored the warning and some admitted to not even reading the instruction manual (UMGC, 2019a). The only problem with the warning is that it does not fully explain the risk or dangers of what will happen if the Dualplex 360 is left plugged in after the battery is fully charged. Although NBD has done the bare minimum by placing a warning in the manual, it is misleading to the consumer by not explaining the full consequences and thus allowing them a fair opportunity to decide whether or not the Dualplex 360 is safe for use. Due to this lack of additional information the disclaimer may be ruled null and void thus allowing NBD to held liable along with fixing or replacing the defective Dualplex 360’s. Conclusion and RecommendationsThe strangest thing to happen is that the known defect seems to have only occurred in Dualplex 360’s that were shipped to the United States, even though it is present in all of them. NBD, Inc. will most likely be found liable in court for their actions. The research and development team knew about the defect and upon doing a cost benefits analysis, decided it was easier to pay out lawsuits than redesign and fix the Dualplex 360 (UMGC, 2019a).