Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
A baby “smart sock,” Owlet, that purportedly monitors a baby’s oxygen level and heart rate and warns parents if things are off malfunctions, according to a new class action lawsuit.
Lead plaintiffs Amanda Ruiz and Marisela Arreola allege in their Owlet class action lawsuit that the smart sock issues false alarms and, more alarmingly, fails to issue a warning when a baby’s oxygen levels are low.
Ruiz says she purchased the second version of the smart sock, but stopped using it after getting two false alarms – red alerts that indicate a serious problem. Ruiz says she called 911 on each of these occasions, but medical professionals found that her child was within normal ranges.
“The Smart Sock gives false alarms and causes parents to rush their babies to the hospital, believing them to be grievously ill,” allege the mothers in their Owlet class action lawsuit. “Owlet has had knowledge about this defect and has referred to it as ‘false alarm fatigue.’”
Arreola says the Owlet Smart Sock 1 failed to warn her on three occasions that her daughter’s oxygen levels were dangerously low. Arreola claims that she discovered her child was turning purple, a sign of low oxygen, but the Owlet monitor failed to provide any warnings.
“Conversely, the Smart Sock also regularly fails to detect abnormal oxygen levels and heart rates–the exact purpose for which it was designed and advertised,” alleges the Owlet Smart Sock class action lawsuit. “Owlet failed to disclose this material information to consumers prior to sale and actively concealed its knowledge of these defects to the purchasing public.”
Owlet release the first device, the Smart Sock 1 in October 2015, according to the Owlet class action. The device works by monitoring the vital signs through pulse oximetry technology. It is worn as a sock on the baby’s foot while sleeping.
At $299 each, the Owlet Smart Sock provides no visual or audio capabilities, notes the Owlet class action lawsuit. Instead, parents must also purchase traditional baby monitors as well.
The product comes in three sizes to fit newborns through 18-month-old toddlers. The product reportedly made millions by “luring” young parents into believing it would help keep their babies safe.
Owlet touts its device as providing parents “peace of mind” regarding their infant’s health, but the Owlet class action lawsuit alleges that the pricey product does not work as advertised.
“The Owlet Smart Sock’s high sales volume can arguably be equally attributed to the information it advertises as well as the information it does not disclose to consumers; i.e., the Smart Sock’s frequent and unnerving false alarms, inaccurate readings, and complete failure to detect and alert to abnormal oxygen levels and heart rates, the exact purpose for which it was designed and advertised,” contends the Owlet class action lawsuit.
In the face of consumer complaints of broken sleep due to false alarms and other device failures, Owlet doubled down, making up false standards and proclaiming that it had conducted “extensive product safety testing,” allege the plaintiffs.
The Owlet class action lawsuit seeks to represent a nationwide Class of consumers who purchased either versions of the Smart Sock, along with California subclasses.
The plaintiffs are represented by Mark A. Ozzello, Tarek H. Zohdy, Cody R. Padgett, and Trisha K. Monesi of Capstone Law APC.
The Owlet Smart Sock Class Action Lawsuit is Ruiz, et al. v. Owlet Baby Care Inc., Case No. 5:19-cv-00182-DDP-SP, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
62 thoughts onOwlet Class Action Says Baby Smart Socks Issue False Alarms
Works great for me. I had one false alarm due to sock placement the day I brought my son home. It clearly says on their website it’s not a medical device. Being a parent is stressful and I bought this for a little relief and it helped. But being scared is a part of parenting. Nothing, other than medical equipment can save lives.
Please add me it’s 230 am, giving false readings, causing my husband and i to jump out of bed, my son was fine machine going off w his heart rate double reading. He was fine.
Please add me
My baby was just burned resulting in Thermal and Friction Burns from the Closed Toe Sock. Please Add Me.
Whatever happened with this? I am awake for the 3rd time in the middle of the night for false notifications of high heart rate. It happens once a week.
Please add me
We are in australia but our baby was burned. Owlet v2
My baby has been burned. I need to be added.
The case is still moving through the courts and has not yet reached a settlement. Claim forms are usually not made available to consumers until after a court approved settlement is reached. Setting up a free account with Top Class Actions will allow you to receive instant updates on ANY article that you ‘Follow’ on our website. A link to creating an account may be found here: https://topclassactions.com/signup/. You can then ‘Follow’ the article above, and get notified immediately when we post updates!
I have been in the er more then 10 time and in clinic at least once a week also had to call 911 at 4am due to The device false Alarms my baby is only 3 months old. My baby has have numerous test done and everything has come back normal This device’s just cause my life more stress and has made it a total nightmare.. I would not recommend this device to any parent
Please add me.
I bought some for my grand-daughter $329.00. They didn’t work. Add me.