|
Apple's advertisements had made various claims about the
iPhone's resistance to damage when submerged or otherwise
exposed to water, including that some models could survive
depths of 4 meters (13.1 feet) for 30 minutes.
The named plaintiffs, two from New York and one from South
Carolina, claimed that Apple's "false and misleading"
misrepresentations let the company charge twice as much for
iPhones than the cost of "average smartphones."
U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan said the plaintiffs
plausibly alleged that Apple's ads could mislead consumers, but
did not show their iPhones were damaged by "liquid contact"
Apple promised they could withstand.
The judge also found no proof of fraud, citing a lack of
evidence that Apple intended to overstate its water resistance
claims, or that the plaintiffs relied on fraudulent marketing
statements when buying their iPhones.
Spencer Sheehan, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said his clients
are disappointed with the decision, and no decision has been
made whether to appeal.
Neither Apple nor lawyers for the Cupertino, California-based
company immediately responded to requests for comment.
In the quarter ended Dec. 25, 2021, iPhones accounted for $71.6
billion, or 58%, of Apple's $123.9 billion of net sales.
The case is Smith et al v Apple Inc, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of New York, No. 21-03657.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Karishma
Singh)
[© 2022 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|
|
