The plaintiffs claimed that the shoes, featuring the brand’s signature CloudTec outsole, produced a “loud, embarrassing, and difficult-to-stop squeaking sound” while walking.

The case was dismissed without prejudice, meaning the plaintiffs may file the lawsuit again after correcting or supplementing their original claims.

The lawsuit was initially filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon in October last year. Plaintiffs Patricia Ramirez and Louis Bologna claimed they suffered financial losses because they paid a premium for the shoes based on the brand’s representations without being informed about the alleged defect.

Ramirez said in the lawsuit that she purchased a pair of On Cloudmonster sneakers from Dick’s Sporting Goods in September 2024. According to her, she noticed almost immediately that the shoes began squeaking with every step.

She claimed she wore the sneakers only three times before “giving up” on them because of the embarrassment and annoyance they caused.

Bologna experienced a similar problem. He purchased a pair of On Cloudmonster sneakers from the brand’s website in September of last year. According to his complaint, after about three months of use, the shoes began squeaking with every step, making it difficult for him to walk or run in them normally.

The plaintiffs also claimed that they tried to resolve the issue by returning the shoes but were unable to do so.

The lawsuit cited numerous posts from users on Reddit and TikTok, as well as negative customer reviews from people who claimed to have experienced the same problem.

The plaintiffs accused On of continuing to sell its expensive athletic shoes despite allegedly knowing about the defect and failing to address it.

According to the plaintiffs, the company could have warned customers about the issue, redesigned the shoes, offered repairs or provided refunds, but allegedly did none of those things.

Ramirez and Bologna also argued that the alleged defect left them with shoes they could no longer use as intended, making them victims of the manufacturer’s actions.

Despite the dismissal, the court’s decision does not necessarily bring the dispute to a final end. Because the case was dismissed without prejudice, the plaintiffs can attempt to bring it back to court after making the necessary changes to their claims.

For On, meanwhile, the case represents an unusual legal episode amid the brand’s rapidly growing popularity.

In March, the company told investors that its Cloudmonster and Cloudsurfer models had contributed “significantly” to business growth in the fourth quarter. Now, one of the brand’s most popular products has found itself at the center of a legal dispute over a rather peculiar complaint — an irritating squeak with every step.