Judge Allows HP Computer Class Action Lawsuit to Proceed Over Inadequate Power

On Wednesday, Feb. 5, a California computer buyer was allowed to proceed with his deceptive marketing class action lawsuit, alleging that the HP computer he purchased in 2010 had insufficient power to handle recommended software upgrades under a fraudulent omission theory.

Lead plaintiff Davis Elias claims in the class action lawsuit that his computer, an HP Pavilion Slimline s5305z, malfunctioned and then was damaged beyond repair outside of the warranty period after he upgraded its base configuration to include a recommended graphics card.

Elias purchased the HP Pavilion computer online from the defendant, Hewlett–Packard Co. (“HP”), and elected to upgrade the base configuration to include a “recommended” graphics card, which HP marketed and advertised as a “faster, higher performance, more powerful and/or upgraded” computer component. Within the first year of ownership, Elias claims his computer began to “randomly freeze, restart, or shut down” and within 17 months, the computer “shorted out,” “melted,” and was damaged beyond repair.

Elias reports in the class action lawsuit that he then learned that the wattage rating of the included power supply of his computer was well below what was needed or recommended to run the computer configuration that he selected from HP at the time of purchase, and that the inadequacy of the power supply caused the computer problems. Elias also alleges that he contacted HP for assistance, but HP would not replace the computer or even agree to repair it. Elias further claims that HP offered the cards despite knowing that they should be installed only on computers with 300 or more watts of power, while his model had only 220 watts.

In December 2011, Elias filed the HP computer class action lawsuit in the Santa Clara County Superior Court. In January 2012, HP successfully removed the case to the U.S. District Court.

Judge Lucy H. Koh dismissed large portions of the first three complaints, but ruled that Elias had included new facts in this fourth version of his class action lawsuit that supported a credible fraudulent omission theory.

Judge Koh noted “[the p]laintiff alleges that Advanced Micro Devices (‘AMD’)—the manufacturer of the upgraded graphics card—expressly recommended that computers containing the specific graphics card selected by Plaintiff be powered by a 300-watt or greater power supply unit” and that “HP was aware of the need to install a more powerful [power supply unit] than was included in Plaintiff’s computer because HP had received customer complaints and warranty service requests regarding the allegedly defective power supply units.”

Judge Koh also points out that “[n]evertheless, HP installed a 220-watt [power supply unit] in Plaintiff’s Slimline computer and neither informed Plaintiff that AMD recommended a 300-watt [power supply unit], nor afforded Plaintiff the option of upgrading his computer’s 220-watt [power supply unit] at the time of purchase. Further, at no time did HP inform Plaintiff that purchasing the graphics card with the Slimline’s standard, non-customizable 220-watt [power supply unit] would decrease the computer’s performance, efficiency, and lifespan, and increase its safety hazards, including the risk of catching fire. Plaintiff alleges that HP intentionally concealed this information with the intent to increase its sales from customers like Plaintiff, who otherwise would not have upgraded his computer to higher-cost components.”

Elias brings the HP Pavilion class action lawsuit on behalf HP computer purchasers nationwide who have experienced problems related to power supply against HP.

Elias is represented by Adam J. Gutride, Seth A. Safier, Todd Kennedy, Kristen Simplicio and Marie McCrary of Gutride Safier LLP.

The HP Computer Power Class Action Lawsuit is Elias v. Hewlett-Packard Co., Case No. 5:12-cv-00421, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.