Apple Sued Over 'False Pixel Counts' in iPhone X Models
Filed in California, the lawsuit proposes nationwide, New York and California classes in going after Apple for allegedly overstating features of iPhone X, XS and XS Max phones.
December 17, 2018 at 04:54 PM
3 minute read
Apple Inc. is facing a class action claiming it paints a misleading picture of the size, resolution and pixel count on the screens on iPhone X, XS, and XS Max models.
The lawsuit, filed Friday in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, accuses Apple of violating consumer protection laws in all 50 states via advertisements on its website that allegedly misrepresent the pixel counts and screen sizes of its phones. Plaintiffs attorney David Makman wrote that the iPhones “have half the advertised number of pixels.”
The “screen size deception,” he wrote, “is simply based on Apple cutting corners.”
“Defendant rounds off the corners of the products' screens and the Products have notches without pixels at the top of their screen, but Defendant calculates the screen size of the Products by including non-screen areas such as the corners and the cut-out notch at the top of the screen,” Makman wrote. “The missing screen areas also reduce the false pixel counts of the products' screens below their advertised pixel counts.”
Though filed in California, the suit also seeks to certify classes in New York and nationally, with claims against Apple brought under both states' respective false advertising laws. The suit also claims violations of California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act and Unfair Competition Law, as well as New York's Deceptive Acts and Practices Act.
“Defendant's marketing of its products falsely inflates their screens' supposed pixel counts, resolutions, and sizes to make the products seem more appealing to consumers,” the complaint says. “Defendant has been unjustly enriched as a result of its unlawful conduct.”
Makman declined to comment on the lawsuit. Also representing the two plaintiffs—residents of California and New York, respectively—is C.K. Lee, a New York-based managing member of Lee Litigation Group. The New York Post has described the firm as “thriving” in New York's “distorted tort system” by bringing more than 1,000 class action suits in Manhattan and Brooklyn federal courts between 2009 and January 2018.
Neither Apple nor Lee responded to requests for comment by press time.
Apple is no stranger to litigation over its popular iPhones. A spate of lawsuits over the company's alleged intentional slowing of processing speeds on older iPhones resulted in a multidistrict litigation. Additionally, Apple found itself involved separate patent disputes with WiLan and Qualcomm over technology in its iPhones.
The pixel litigation initially has been assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Nathanael Cousins. An initial case management conference is scheduled for March 20 in San Jose.
Read the Complaint:
Read More:
Little-Known Chinese IP Firm Secures China iPhone Injunctions for Qualcomm
ITC Might Block Imports of Intel-Supplied iPhones After All
'There's An App for That,' Sure, but Perhaps Not an Apple Victory at SCOTUS
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllElevate Acquires Intellectual Property Research Provider Sagacious IP
3 minute readFederal Judge Pauses Trump Funding Freeze as Democratic AGs Plan Suit
4 minute readArentFox Schiff Adds Global Complex Litigation Partner in Los Angeles
Trending Stories
- 1'Reverse Robin Hood': Capital One Swarmed With Class Actions Alleging Theft of Influencer Commissions in January
- 2Hawaii wildfire victims spared from testifying after last-minute deal over $4B settlement
- 3How We Won It: Latham Secures Back-to-Back ITC Patent Wins for California Companies
- 4Meta agrees to pay $25 million to settle lawsuit from Trump after Jan. 6 suspension
- 5Stevens & Lee Hires Ex-Middle District of Pennsylvania U.S. Attorney as White-Collar Co-Chair
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250