Hewlett-Packard Warranty Class Action Lawsuit Dismissed Until Further Clarified

Plaintiff Maury Adkins is back at square one after a federal judge in California granted Hewlett-Packard’s motion to dismiss the proposed class action lawsuit until Adkins can more clearly state his case.

In May of this year, Maury Adkins filed a class action lawsuit against Hewlett-Packard for allegedly violating false advertising and consumer protection laws. According to Adkins’ allegations, he claimed that HP started the one-year limited warranty coverage before consumers purchased their products, rather than commencing on the date of purchase, when HP products were purchased through retailers.

According to the HP warranty class action lawsuit, Adkins purchased a laptop from a Walmart in November of 2013 and was deceived into thinking that the laptop came with a one-year warranty from the time he purchased it. In September of 2014, the mouse on the laptop stopped working and he called HP support and was allegedly told that his warranty ended in six days, and that the “pre activation support” for the computer began in September 2013.

At that time, Adkins sent the computer via overnight mail and it was returned to him by HP after it was repaired. In November of 2014, Adkins had more problems with his laptop and contacted HP support again. This time, he was told that his HP computer warranty period had expired and was required to pay for additional phone support, and he claimed HP refused to change the warranty start date.

U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman dismissed the HP warranty class action lawsuit on Aug. 20, saying that by Adkins’ own admission, the claims in the case were not clear. According to the judge’s order, “Plaintiff shall therefore have lave to amend to more clearly articulate his theory and the ‘who, what, when, where and how’ of Defendant’s fraud, with particular emphasis on the ‘what.’”

HP claimed that Adkins did not dispute that the computer came with a warranty period of one year. According to the company, the warranty terms specify that in order to receive warranty benefits, the customer may be required to provide proof of purchase. HP believed this was a reasonable requirement for warranty protection, especially when the computer is purchased through a retailer. HP argued that Atkins never claimed he fulfilled the requirement.

As Adkins begins to clarify the allegations in the class action lawsuit, he will need to more explicitly state that HP began the warranty period prior to a customer’s purchase. Additionally, Adkins will have to spell out the ties between HP’s conduct and California to bring forth his claims about state consumer protection, as the location where the unlawful conduct occurred was not clear.

Adkins is a resident of Alabama and purchased his computer in Massachusetts. Hewlett-Packard is headquartered in California. According to the court report, “In determining whether California law should apply to a certain claim, courts consider facts like where the defendant is located, where the class members are located, and where decisions about the behavior in question were made.”

Adkins has until Oct. 20, 2015 to file an amended complaint.

Adkins is represented by Adam J. Gutride, Seth A. Safier and Marie A. McCrary of Gutride Safier LLP.

The HP Warranty Class Action Lawsuit is Maury Adkins, et al. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., et al., Case No. 5:15-cv-02035, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division.