Apple escalates iPhone battery suit to federal court
Hoping to level the playing field for its legal defense, Apple, Inc. has moved a lawsuit over allegedly deceptive iPhone battery claims to a federal court.
Filed this past Friday, the action would remove Jose Truijllo's pioneering suit from its original home in a state court in Cook County, Illinois to a federal institution for the Northern District of Illinois. Trujillo had originally filed a suit in early August that charged Apple and AT&T with concealing an alleged need to replace the cellphone's battery every year while locking customers into a two-year service contract.
Apple was able to make the shift under a recent but increasingly used law known as the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, or CAFA. Under the terms of the law, any suit whose defendants are based in a different state from the plaintiff, and where damages would total over $5 million, can be moved to the federal level. According to California-based Apple, using the more cautious estimates of Trujillo's complaint would easily amount to over $17 million before factoring in punitive damages -- in essence, the equivalent of at least 200,000 4GB iPhones and their battery replacement bills.
The nature of the law allows the iPhone maker to transfer the suit to a different court without any input from the plaintiff, according to CAFA's terms. While this may seem unfair to a casual observer, the Act is designed to prevent the potential biases in judgment that might stem from a trial outside of the defendant's home territory. A federal court would be more likely to consider a case involving multi-state parties objectively, says the reasoning behind the statute.
Co-defendendant AT&T has yet to comment on the decision, but its involvement isn't required; CAFA allows any defendant to remove a case without the agreement of any other companies named in the suit.
And while Apple has had to list the damages it might owe, the transfer notice makes it clear that the company isn't admitting any guilt in the process. In Apple's view, the case would tilt in the defendants' favor regardless of where it took place.
"Apple disputes [the] Plaintiff's allegations, believes the Complaint lacks merit, and denies that [the] Plaintiff or the putative class have been harmed in any way," the company's lawyers said.
Filed this past Friday, the action would remove Jose Truijllo's pioneering suit from its original home in a state court in Cook County, Illinois to a federal institution for the Northern District of Illinois. Trujillo had originally filed a suit in early August that charged Apple and AT&T with concealing an alleged need to replace the cellphone's battery every year while locking customers into a two-year service contract.
Apple was able to make the shift under a recent but increasingly used law known as the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, or CAFA. Under the terms of the law, any suit whose defendants are based in a different state from the plaintiff, and where damages would total over $5 million, can be moved to the federal level. According to California-based Apple, using the more cautious estimates of Trujillo's complaint would easily amount to over $17 million before factoring in punitive damages -- in essence, the equivalent of at least 200,000 4GB iPhones and their battery replacement bills.
The nature of the law allows the iPhone maker to transfer the suit to a different court without any input from the plaintiff, according to CAFA's terms. While this may seem unfair to a casual observer, the Act is designed to prevent the potential biases in judgment that might stem from a trial outside of the defendant's home territory. A federal court would be more likely to consider a case involving multi-state parties objectively, says the reasoning behind the statute.
Co-defendendant AT&T has yet to comment on the decision, but its involvement isn't required; CAFA allows any defendant to remove a case without the agreement of any other companies named in the suit.
And while Apple has had to list the damages it might owe, the transfer notice makes it clear that the company isn't admitting any guilt in the process. In Apple's view, the case would tilt in the defendants' favor regardless of where it took place.
"Apple disputes [the] Plaintiff's allegations, believes the Complaint lacks merit, and denies that [the] Plaintiff or the putative class have been harmed in any way," the company's lawyers said.
Comments
So...this guy thinks he's entitled to millions and millions of dollars because he might have to replace his battery in a year?
Two words. Public. Beheading.
Then chop off the hands that feeds them (the Plaintiff's)
Then and only then Behead them both!
Cruel, yes. Justifiable, definitely
First chop off the feet of the Lawyer that takes the money and runs.
Then chop off the hands that feeds them (the Plaintiff's)
Then and only then Behead them both!
Cruel, yes. Justifiable, definitely
"So this is what it's like when Doves cry"
But Apple, being Apple decided to eliminate that customer problem each year by putting in a honking HUGE lithium-ion battery that will last inside the iPhone for 3-5 years or perhaps longer.
A new iPhone battery costs $20 and every iPod battery replacement shop will put it in for $5 or less. So this ISN'T an issue about the battery, it's about EDUCATING the public on how long the iPhone battery lasts.
I think the whole problem with this is people have been "conditioned" to think a Cell Phone Battery lasts about a year of hard use, you pop it out, and slide in a new one.
But Apple, being Apple decided to eliminate that customer problem each year by putting in a honking HUGE lithium-ion battery that will last inside the iPhone for 3-5 years or perhaps longer.
A new iPhone battery costs $20 and every iPod battery replacement shop will put it in for $5 or less. So this ISN'T an issue about the battery, it's about EDUCATING the public on how long the iPhone battery lasts.
I agree with you. I can't see the reason of all this mess on iPhone's battery.
A single charge lasts a lot. Could we assume a charge cycle every 3-4 days? OK: that's something like than 4 years before reaching the 80% efficiency in recharging (400 charge cycles).
Eighty percent! At that level, a single charge wouldn't last 4 days, but 3 sure it would! So, what's up after 4 years of use?
And, I beg your pardon but.... are we sure those complaining guys will own the very SAME old iPhone model after 2 years?
So, again: what's up with the battery? It's not user-replaceable. You don't need to for a nicely long time.
I agree with you. I can't see the reason of all this mess on iPhone's battery.
A single charge lasts a lot. Could we assume a charge cycle every 3-4 days? OK: that's something like than 4 years before reaching the 80% efficiency in recharging (400 charge cycles).
Eighty percent! At that level, a single charge wouldn't last 4 days, but 3 sure it would! So, what's up after 4 years of use?
And, I beg your pardon but.... are we sure those complaining guys will own the very SAME old iPhone model after 2 years?
So, again: what's up with the battery? It's not user-replaceable. You don't need to for a nicely long time.
I know people with the a 1G 10GB iPod that still gets 6-8 hours of charge on those 6 year old iPods. And it's driving a hard disk, I don't see any way that Apple will have problems with the batteries in the iPhones in a year.
I'm Glad Apple has decided to call the bluff and fight this, what ever is ruled here will apply to every case brought up in the future.
I agree with you. I can't see the reason of all this mess on iPhone's battery.
A single charge lasts a lot. Could we assume a charge cycle every 3-4 days? OK: that's something like than 4 years before reaching the 80% efficiency in recharging (400 charge cycles).
Eighty percent! At that level, a single charge wouldn't last 4 days, but 3 sure it would! So, what's up after 4 years of use?
And, I beg your pardon but.... are we sure those complaining guys will own the very SAME old iPhone model after 2 years?
So, again: what's up with the battery? It's not user-replaceable. You don't need to for a nicely long time.
yes! my iphone seems to have wonderful battery life, i charge it when i sync, but never have even remotely gone below 50% and that's after days without charging or syncing.
to be fair, I think Apple should have issued some kind of "educational" statement that the battery inside the iPhone is 3 times larger than a typical cell phone, etc... but I'm sure there are legal issues with that... and sure there are probably people that the battery has already failed, and sure some will fail 1 day out of warranty.
but it all boils down to the "public" not understanding the level apple goes into building great products. apple simply isn't the type of company that says, "perfect, we engineered the battery fail exactly 1 day after warranty" so we get $90 in revenue each year!"" sorry, john q pubic, it doesn't work that way.
apple engineers its stuff to last 3-5 years without ANY intervention by the "user", same with the iphone.
so we are only fighting ignorance here, the courts will surely see it correctly.
-
I think the whole problem with this is people have been "conditioned" to think a Cell Phone Battery lasts about a year of hard use, you pop it out, and slide in a new one.
But Apple, being Apple decided to eliminate that customer problem each year by putting in a honking HUGE lithium-ion battery that will last inside the iPhone for 3-5 years or perhaps longer.
A new iPhone battery costs $20 and every iPod battery replacement shop will put it in for $5 or less. So this ISN'T an issue about the battery, it's about EDUCATING the public on how long the iPhone battery lasts.
Why do people have replaceable laptop batteries? Its not just because they go belly up in a year. Its also so, after extraordinary heavy or long-term use, you can pop it out and replace it so you can keep working.
If your stuck on an extra-long flight, with standard delays, plane changing, etc, listening to your ipod and/or watching videos, you may be desperate for a second battery half way through some movie. Or running out of life and not being able to use the phone when you land.
Why do people have replaceable laptop batteries? Its not just because they go belly up in a year. Its also so, after extraordinary heavy or long-term use, you can pop it out and replace it so you can keep working.
If your stuck on an extra-long flight, with standard delays, plane changing, etc, listening to your ipod and/or watching videos, you may be desperate for a second battery half way through some movie. Or running out of life and not being able to use the phone when you land.
What 7hrs video or 24hours audio isn't enough, I have had my iPhone last for 10hrs of video and 29hours of audio on a single charge. This is not an iPod its an iPhone, and it still has better batter life than my iPod video. My company purchased a 2nd battery for my pocket pc phone (what crap) I have not used it, it takes the batteries 2.5hours to charge and they only last for 1 day with small amount of use. You can always do what most people who fly, and turn off the phone (per FAA regulations), and then you can use your phone when you land.
So...this guy thinks he's entitled to millions and millions of dollars because he might have to replace his battery in a year?
It's a class-action lawsuit. That means this guy expects lots of other people to sign on as co-plaintiffs. Any settlement or judgement in the plaintiffs' favour would be shared amongst all of them (and their lawyers).
By my reading of the article, apparently the damages estimate was supposed to include a full rebate of the original purchase price, plus the cost of the first battery replacement, plus compensation for whatever pain and suffering may have been caused by the trauma of the phone's premature death. Assuming 200,000 people signed on as co-plaintiffs, the estimated the payout would total in the millions.
Not saying I agree with the merits of the case. I'm just setting the record straight that none of the plaintiffs would individually stand to receive millions of dollars in compensation. Only the lawsuit's lead lawyer could make that claim.
If your stuck on an extra-long flight, with standard delays, plane changing, etc, listening to your ipod and/or watching videos, you may be desperate for a second battery half way through some movie. Or running out of life and not being able to use the phone when you land.
Well, there's always one of the many battery extenders available for purchase.
http://www.amazon.com/iZap-Battery-E.../dp/B000UFPJ2Y