Abstract: At 10:45 a.m. on October 30, 2019, an employee was working as a maintenance technician for a firm that manufactured industrial molds. He was working in the facility's engineering lab, programming leak test equipment. During the test, there was a bad leak in some equipment. The correct pressure was not being reached. The guards had been removed from that part of the equipment, as the technician needed to look for the leak. Initially, a soapy water spray was used to identify the source of the leak. The leak was found and repaired immediately. During this process, the firm's service sales manager and the employee were present. After the leak was fixed, a test was done to confirm that there were no other leaks. This test was performed without the guards in place. The maintenance technician replaced a lid for the test and pushed in the lid. His thumb was close to a die that came down as part of the test, and it was pinched. When the employee pulled back his hand in reaction, the tip of his thumb was amputated. He was hospitalized. The sales manager related that the equipment on which the employee was injured was made in-house by the firm and still under development. There were two types of test equipment. One tested the assembly for the battery lid cover, and the other did the air leak test for the lid cover. The employee was injured while using the air leak test equipment. There were no guards in place during the leak test. With the guards in place, the gaps were 0.5 inches (13 mm) on the sides and 0.625 inches (16 mm) on the top. The areas to the side of the air leak test were covered by a transparent guard, similar to a face shield. The sales manager said that, though not expecting the employee to perform another test without the guards, he could have given the employee a tool or something similar to push the lid to the die, thus avoiding the danger zone. Replacing the lid to the die by pushing a cart would have kept the employee at a distance of 21 inches (533 mm).