CertainTeed’s discontinued Horizon asphalt-fiberglass shingles—installed on many homes and buildings from 1995 to 2010—are alleged to suffer premature failure, meaning they can crack, shed granules, or otherwise deteriorate well before a typical roof’s expected service life. When shingles fail early, the harm is not just cosmetic: water intrusion and related repairs can lead to broader property damage and significant out-of-pocket costs. Because these products were installed decades ago, many property owners may only discover the problem years later, once leaks or widespread deterioration appear. The class action, *Segebarth, et al. v. CertainTeed LLC* (E.D. Pa., No. 2:19-cv-05500-PD), was filed to address claims that Horizon shingles were defective and caused economic loss and property damage, even though CertainTeed denied wrongdoing. The settlement (finally approved in December 2022) provides a structured remedy: eligible owners can seek shingle replacement (partial if damage is under 5% of a roof plane, full if more extensive), potential reimbursement up to $40 per square foot for replaced areas on a prorated basis, and a five-year extension of existing warranties (to 30 years for 1995–2003 installs and 35 years for 2004–2010 installs), with claims due by March 2, 2030. Its significance is that it converts what might otherwise be individualized, expensive roof-dispute fights into a uniform claims process that can compensate owners without requiring each person to prove their case at trial. This case fits a broader pattern of construction-products litigation where alleged defects only surface after long-term exposure to weather, making warranty terms, documentation of damage, and timing critical. Roofing sits in a heavily standardized part of the building-products industry—manufacturers market shingles using long warranty periods and performance expectations tied to building-code and testing frameworks (commonly including ASTM material/performance standards and code regimes like the International Residential Code as adopted locally), yet real-world performance can diverge from lab ratings due to manufacturing variability and installation conditions. Similar class actions involving shingles and other exterior building materials often hinge on whether the issue is a covered “manufacturing defect” versus excluded wear, poor installation, or storm damage—an industry-wide tension that helps explain why settlements frequently offer prorated reimbursement, defined damage thresholds, and extended warranties rather than an across-the-board replacement promise.