SoClean Lawsuit Allege Toxins in CPAP Cleaning Devices, Class Actions Mount

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.

SoClean Lawsuit Overview: 

• Who: SoClean has been hit with another class action lawsuit for allegedly misrepresenting the safety of its CPAP cleaning devices.
• What: Consumers say the company falsely says its CPAP cleaning devices are “safe” and “healthy” when they emit the toxic gas ozone at levels unsafe to humans.
• Where: The new class action was filed on behalf of Arkansas consumers.

SoClean falsely tells customers its CPAP cleaning devices are “safe” and “healthy” when they emit the toxic gas ozone at levels unsafe to humans, a new class action lawsuit alleges.

The SoClean lawsuit was filed in Arkansas on October 12 by lead plaintiff Steve Landers, who alleges that the company violates federal law by failing to disclose its devices emit ozone and by falsely representing that its devices use “activated oxygen” to clean CPAP cleaning machines.

It is the latest in a string of SoClean lawsuits filed against the company over the use of ozone in the CPAP cleaning devices, which Landers says in his claim, to be effective as a germicide, must be present in a concentration far greater than can be safely tolerated by people or animals.

SoClean Lawsuit Claims Consumers Misled About Safety of CPAP Cleaning Device

The company makes the SoClean 2 CPAP Sanitizing Machine and the SoClean 2 Go CPAP Sanitizing Machine that work by generating ozone to sterilize and deodorize the devices. However, ozone is an unstable toxic gas with a pungent characteristic odor — sometimes described as “clean” smelling — that can kill bacteria and viruses, the claim explains.

According to the SoClean lawsuit, the company’s representations are designed to mislead consumers into believing that the machine uses a benign form of oxygen to clean CPAP machines rather than a harsh gas that is generally only suitable for commercial sanitization under highly controlled conditions.

“SoClean’s marketing materials fail to disclose that its devices emit ozone, which is a longstanding requirement of federal law,” Landers says.

“Instead, SoClean falsely represents that its devices use ‘activated oxygen’ to clean CPAP machines. SoClean markets the devices as ‘safe’ and  ‘healthy,; which is false give that they generate toxic ozone gas at levels that substantially exceed federal regulations.”

Additionally, Lander says, SoClean falsely claims that its devices are “sealed” so that “activated oxygen” (i.e. ozone) does not escape the devices.

“SoClean devices are so dangerous and destructive that several of the largest manufacturers of CPAP machines in the United States require purchasers to acknowledge that they have been informed that if the purchaser uses a SoClean device to clean their CPAP machine, the warranty of their CPAP machine will be voided,” he points out in the claim.

Landers’ SoClean lawsuit comes as more than 90 lawsuits filed against Koninklijke Philips for its allegedly toxic sleep apnea devices have been consolidated into a multi district litigation and sent to a Pittsburgh federal court for litigation.

The lawsuits followed a recall notice for the devices said that they could cause skin, eye, and respiratory tract irritation, an inflammatory response, headaches, asthma, adverse effects to other organs (e.g. kidneys and liver), and toxic carcinogenic effects, due to contain polyester-based polyurethane sound abatement foam, or PEPUR foam, which the claims all say can degrade and release toxins into users’ airways.

Landers is looking to represent anyone in Arkansas who purchased or used a SoClean device to clean and sanitize their CPAP, BiPAP or Mechanical Ventilation machine.

He is suing for breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, fraudulent misrepresentation, fraud by omission, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and more. He seeks certification of the Class, damages, interest, legal fees and costs, and a jury trial.

Have you ever used a SoClean device to clean a CPAP? Let us know your experience in the comments section!

Landers is represented by Thomas P. Thrash and Will T. Crowder of Thrash Law Firm, P.A.; John M. Deakle, Russell L. Johnson, and Ronald V. Johnson of Deakle-Johnson Law Firm, PLLC; and Patrick W. Pendley and Andrea Barient, of Pendley, Baudin & Coffin.

The SoClean Toxic CPAP Cleaning Device Class Action Lawsuit is Landers v. SoClean, Inc., Case No. 4:21-cv-00919-BSM in the Circuit Court of Pulaski County, Arkansas, 17th Division.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Dozens of Philips CPAP Lawsuits Suing for ‘Toxic’ Sleep Apnea Devices Consolidated, Sent to Federal Court
• Delta Airlines Baggage Handler Co Can’t Get BIPA Class Action Tossed
• Class Action Lawsuits Continue To Mount Against Philips Over Breathing Device Recalls
• Insurer Who Denied Autism Treatments Pays $1.7M Class Action Settlement to Policy Holders