The MachineRecord
RegistryTMR-0126

Former Figure AI principal robotic safety engineer Robert Gruendel sued the company in the Northern District of California, alleging he was dismissed in September 2025 after warning executives that the company's humanoid robots were powerful enough to fracture a human skull, and citing a malfunction in which a robot carved a quarter-inch gash into a steel refrigerator door.

Property damagelawsuithumanoidFigure AI
Date of incident
2025-09-01
Location
Northern District of California, USA
Sources
3
EscalationLawsuit

Established by press reporting. No regulator or court document is linked to this case yet.

Timeline

How the event developed

  1. 2025-11-22Lawsuit

    Former Figure AI principal robotic safety engineer Robert Gruendel sued the company in the Northern District of California, alleging he was dismissed in September 2025 after warning executives that the company's humanoid robots were powerful enough to fracture a human skull, and citing a malfunction in which a robot carved a quarter-inch gash into a steel refrigerator door.

    techspot.com
  2. 2025-11-22Lawsuit

    A whistleblower lawsuit filed by former Figure AI safety engineer Robert Gruendel alleges the company rushed commercialization of its humanoid robot without adequate safety procedures, and that impact tests showed the robot could generate force more than twice sufficient to fracture an adult human skull, before Gruendel was terminated in September 2025.

    gizmodo.com
  3. 2025-12-01Follow-up

    Former Figure AI principal robotic safety engineer a person filed a lawsuit alleging he was fired in September 2025 after warning executives that the company's humanoid robots were powerful enough to fracture a human skull, citing an incident in which a malfunctioning robot narrowly missed an employee and carved a quarter-inch gash into a steel refrigerator door.

    en.as.com
Sources

Every claim above traces to one of these

Links are never hidden behind a paywall of ours. Where a copy of the page exists it is linked beside the source with the date it was taken, because news links rot and a dead link next to a saved copy is still evidence. Some copies predate this register: they were made by the Internet Archive before we existed, and the date shown is the date of that copy, not of our visit.

Right of reply

Named in this case?

Any company named here can submit a response. We publish it in the case unedited, and a request makes the pipeline re-check the case against its own sources within a day. Target turnaround for our reply is five working days.