Inmo has recalled more than 1,600 Air3 smart glasses after ten burn complaints. The US Consumer Product Safety Commission posted the action on its recall portal. The filing covers units distributed in the United States and Canada between December 2025 and August 2026.

What triggered the recall?

The CPSC notice identifies a thermal defect in the left temple of the Air3 frame. The component "can overheat during extended use, posing a risk of serious injury or death due to burn hazard," the agency stated. The same filing records ten consumer reports of a "burning sensation to the face and the left side of the ear."

Inmo did not respond to a request for technical detail before publication. The notice does not name the subsystem at fault. Candidates include the battery cell, display driver board, antenna module, or flex interconnect running through the temple. The recall filing leaves that question open.

How large is the exposure?

The recall covers more than 1,600 units shipped to North American customers. Ten reported burns against 1,600 shipments yield a 0.6 percent incident rate. CPSC injury data historically undercounts actual consumer complaints, so the real figure may sit higher.

Retail pricing ranged from $900 to over $1,000 per pair. That positions the Air3 in the early-adopter price band. Distribution ran through Inmo's direct website, Amazon, and a Kickstarter campaign. The recall notice does not address units shipped outside North America.

What remedy is being offered?

Inmo is providing a free software update as the corrective action, per The Verge's coverage of the CPSC filing. The recall posting does not specify the scope of the firmware change. Software-only remediation implies a firmware-resident fault, perhaps in duty-cycle control, charging logic, or thermal management code.

A skeptic will note the limits of any firmware patch. Code changes cannot reduce resistive heating in a lithium cell. They can throttle performance and lower surface temperature. If the underlying fault is hardware, the recall text understates the remedy. Inmo has not clarified.

What has not been disclosed?

The filing leaves several gaps that warrant scrutiny. There is no record of medical treatment among the ten affected users. There is no serial-number range that would let consumers confirm their unit's status. There is no deadline by which Inmo must complete the rollout.

Inmo had not posted a recall notice on its own website at the time of the CPSC filing. Owners who purchased through Kickstarter may rely on backer updates rather than direct outreach.

Forward look

A thermal recall at any scale can stall a category still building consumer trust. The remedy's effectiveness in the field will define the next reporting milestone. Confirmation that no further burn reports reach CPSC by year-end would close the incident. Further complaints would reopen the question of hardware intervention.