(CN) – Apple won a ruling to dismiss a class action that claims it misled customers in marketing the iPad, a device the class claims overheats and shuts down when used outside. A federal judge in San Jose, Calif., said the lawsuit was too vague.
Lead plaintiffs Jacob Baltazar, Claudia Keller and John Browning had alleged that the iPad is prone to overheating within a short time and shutting down when used outdoors, which they each experienced after purchasing the product.
U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel last week granted the motion to dismiss the complaint, which had included claims for breach of warranty, fraud, misrepresentation and false advertising.
The class representatives argued in the complaint that “the iPad does not function in many of the outdoor environments depicted in the advertisements, nor within the temperature range of 32 and 95 degrees Fahrenheit,” as they found Apple had promised.
One claim in the lawsuit points out that the iPad cannot be used as e-reader, though Apple’s website likens the device to a book. “However, contrary to this promis, using the iPad is not ‘just like reading a book,’ at all since books do not close when the reader is enjoying them in the sunlight or in other normal environmental environments [sic],” the suit states.
Judge Fogel did not find such claims credible. “None of the named plaintiffs alleges that he or she relied either on the ambient temperature ranges contained on the product packaging or on Apple’s promotional claim that reading on ‘iPad is just like reading a book,'” he wrote.
“At the least, plaintiffs must identify the particular commercial or advertisement upon which they relied and must describe with the requisite specificity the content of that particular commercial or advertisement,” the judge noted, addressing the class claim for breach of express warranty. “Moreover, each named plaintiff must allege with greater specificity his or her reasonable reliance on the particular commercial or advertisement.”
In granting Apple’s motion to dismiss, Judge Fogel gave the class 30 days to file an amended complaint and deferred ruling on Apple’s motion to strike the class allegations.