Apple iPhone Owners Denied Class Cert. in Touch­screen Defect Lawsuit

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.

Apple consumers have been denied Class certification in their iPhone touchscreen defect lawsuit after a federal judge found that the consumers failed to meet the predominance requirement for certification.

U.S. District Judge Lucy H. Koh stated that the plaintiffs’ expert proposed a damages model with a number of flaws, failing to show that damages can be calculated on a Class-wide basis.

In her 45-page ruling, Judge Koh found that the damages model incorrectly assumed that the touchscreen defect will manifest in all iPhones. In reality, the defect occurs in 5.6 percent of phones or less, she said.

“Missing from these options is any suggestion that defect might not manifest,” Judge Koh said. “This absence puts [the expert’s] damages model at odds with plaintiffs’ theory of liability because plaintiffs’ theory of liability rests on the risk that the defect might manifest, not that the defect is certain to manifest.”

The proposed state Classes for Colorado and Texas, brought under state consumer protection laws, were found to not meet the predominance requirement for Class certification, Judge Koh stated. The Classes for Illinois, Florida, and Washington were adequately pled under consumer protection laws, but the damage model was flawed, so they also did not meet the predominance requirement.

The Apple consumers filed their class action in August 2016, alleging that the company hid a defect associated with the external casing of the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus. The alleged defect can put the integrity of the casing at risk, failing to protect the phone from bending during normal use.

This can allegedly impact the internal wiring and cause the touchscreen to fail over time. The lawsuit claims that Apple knew about the defect before the models were released in September 2014 but failed to warn consumers.

In July 2017, Judge Koh dismissed most of the claims in the class action. However, she kept the fraud claims brought under state consumer protection statutes based on a fraud omission theory.

In January 2018, the plaintiffs asked the court to certify a Class of buyers who reside in Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Washington, and Texas, whose iPhone 6 or iPhone 6 Plus models were manufactured without epoxy underfill in the integrated circuit chip. The plaintiffs claim that the epoxy uderfill would have prevented the defect.

Apple opposed the certification bid, arguing that the consumers didn’t have standing to sue for multiple reasons, including that none of the lead plaintiffs purchased an iPhone 6.

In her ruling, Judge Koh rejected Apple’s arguments, finding that the iPhone 6 is similar enough to the iPhone 6 Plus, which the plaintiffs own, to have the same defects. She also found that the lead plaintiffs had standing to sue and met the numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy requirements for certification.

The plaintiffs are represented by Richard D. McCune, David C. Wright, Joseph G. Sauder, Matthew D. Schelkopf and Joseph B. Kenney of McCune Wright Arevalo LLP.

The Apple iPhone 6 Touchscreen Defect Class Action Lawsuit is Thomas Davidson, et al. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 5:16­-cv­-04942, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.