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 class action lawsuit claims that Owlet’s “Smart Sock” sends parents false alarms about their babies’ health or doesn’t alert them when babies are in danger, and in some cases, burn infants’ feet.
The Owlet Smart Socks class action lawsuit was filed by Amanda Ruiz and Marisela Arreola who say they both purchased the Smart Sock for their children and experienced the defect.
They claim that they were financially injured by their purchase of the socks, and say their babies’ health was put at risk.
Ruiz says that she was given an Owlet Smart Sock 2 as a baby gift around August 2018. She says that she followed the instructions for use, and within the first two weeks of use, the Smart Sock gave two “red” alerts, which she calls “the most critical and immediate of the Smart Sock alarms.”
The Owlet Smart Sock class action alleges that on the first occasion, Ruiz was alerted that her baby had low oxygen, and on the second occasion, the Smart Sock alerted her that the baby had low oxygen and an abnormal heart rate.
Ruiz goes on to say that on both occasions, she physically checked on her baby in a response to these alerts and called 911 based on the alerts. According to Owlet class action, when the paramedics examined her baby, they found the oxygen and heart rate within the normal range.
Allegedly, she then returned the Smart Sock 2 after these incidences and purchased a new Smart Sock 2, and again received false alarms about her baby’s health. The plaintiff says that after the false alarm with the new Smart Sock, her pediatrician assured her that her child’s health was normal.
In contrast, Arreola says she purchased a Smart Sock 1 baby monitor on or around Oct. 20, 2016 directly from Owlet’s website.
She claims that she conducted thorough research of the Smart Sock on the website. According to both Ruiz and Arreola, accuracy and reliability were their foremost concern when choosing a baby monitor.
The Owlet Smart Sock class action claims that in November 2016, Arreola checked on her daughter and noticed her turning purple because her oxygen levels were low. This was allegedly confirmed by a pediatrician. However, the Smart Sock reportedly never alerted Arreola to her baby’s low oxygen level.
Arreola then goes on to say that in December 2016 she again noticed her daughter turning purple because of low oxygen levels. Allegedly, the baby was wearing the Smart Sock at the time, but the Smart Sock never alerted Arreola to the issue. Arreola states that her daughter had to be admitted to the ICU because of low oxygen levels.
The Owlet baby sock class action lawsuit states that Arreola and Ruiz are not the only people who experienced these issues — as there are numerous online complaints of the Smart Socks malfunctioning. The plaintiffs note that in one case, a parent reported that the Smart Sock burned a baby’s feet.
Arreola and Ruiz’s attorneys claim that Owlet knew or should have known that their devices were defective and sold them nonetheless. They argue that Owlet misrepresents the socks as reliable and accurate in an effort to entice parents into buying the baby monitor.
Ruiz and Arreola aim to represent themselves and all other parents who used the Owlet Smart Socks on their babies and experienced the alleged defect. The parents previously filed another Owlet Smart Sock class action lawsuit in California earlier this year. However, they voluntarily dismissed that case so they could file the latest Owlet class action in Utah which is corporate headquarters for the Smart Sock manufacturer.
Ruiz and Arreola are represented by Elaina M. Maragakis of Ray Quinley & Nebeker PC, and Mark A. Ozzello, Tarek H. Zohdy, Cody R. Padgett and Trisha K. Monesi of Capstone Law APC.
The Owlet Smart Sock Defect Class Action Lawsuit is Amanda Ruiz and Marisela Arreola v. Owlet Baby Care Inc., Case No. 2:19-cv-00252-DAK, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah.
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.
43 thoughts onOwlet Class Action Says Smart Sock Doesn’t Work, Burns Infants’ Feet
Saturday morning my husband and I woke up to our daughter making a weird noise. He tried waking her but she wouldn’t move. He grabbed her and picked her up and she wasn’t breathing. He finally got her to gasp. We had the owlet sock on and not once did it alert us. Checked the app it claimed her oxygen was at 99%
My daughter got burned as well
My child has burns on his toes and on the bottom of his foot ADD ME I HAVE PICTURES
This Sock Just gave my 5 and a half month baby blisters and burns from using the closed toe owlet sock right where the sensors are on the side.
Please add me! This sock burned my baby’s foot last night and I am very mad about this! It is supposed to give us peace of mind and all it does it five false alarms and hurts our babies!
The Owlet Smart sock has also burned my babies foot. Please add me
You can add me as well.
April 2020 and still having issues. My baby is 2 months old and I’ve already had 3 false alarms, all of which were for low oxygen. Wish I had never bought the stupid thing, wouldn’t have the terrifying experience of hearing that alarm! Please add me!
The Smart Sock burned my daughters foot as well. Also sent false alarms. Is there something I can do to help the CLA? I have pictures. Also we have spoken with Owlet and get the run around along with denials even though they admitted that the wrinkling of the plastic windows has caused issues.
Add me please
Add me