Samsung QLED Televisions
Allegations: Falsely marketing that televisions have features that they do not have
In January 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung for allegedly misrepresenting the energy efficiency of its televisions. Specifically, the complaint claims that Samsung televisions have ENERGYGUIDE labels and the ENERGY STAR® logo indicating that the televisions meet ENERGY STAR® program standards for energy efficiency when, in reality, the televisions are programmed to disable energy-saving features when consumers adjust the default picture settings. In addition, the complaint claims that Samsung tailored energy-saving features to reduce energy usage during testing and not in real world conditions. (Coghlan et al v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Case No. 17-cv-715, S. D. NY.)
For more information about other class-action lawsuits filed against Samsung and TINA.org’s coverage of the company, click here.
Allegations: Falsely marketing that televisions have features that they do not have
Allegations: Failing to disclose that appliances emit pollutants that are harmful to people
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing that smartphones of 128 GB of storage
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing the smartphone as durable
Allegations: Representing that it safeguards consumers’ personal data when such claims are not true
Allegations: Falsely marketing that the refresh rate (also known as the “Motion Rate”) of televisions is 120 Hz when the actual refresh rate is 60 Hz
Allegations: Misleading water-resistant claims
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing devices as having “supreme flexibility” when they don’t work as advertised
Allegations: Falsely marketing appliances as “fingerprint resistant” and failing to disclose that “black stainless steel” is actually regular stainless steel with a black coating that flakes and peels off
Allegations: Falsely representing the speed and storage capacity of Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphones
Allegations: Misleadingly advertising the black stainless steel finish on appliances as durable when the finish is a thin plastic coating that is prone to peel, chip and flake
In September 2020, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung Electronics America for allegedly falsely marketing its Galaxy S7 cellphones as water resistant when, according to the complaint, they are…
January 2019: The claims against Best Buy were dismissed for failure to state a claim. 2018: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung Electronics and Best Buy stores regarding the…
In December 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung Electronics for allegedly misleadingly advertising phones and tablets with PenTile screens – including Wave and Galaxy devices – as being…
September 2018: This case was transferred to federal court. (Case No. 18-cv-62111, S.D. Fla.) August 2018: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung for allegedly falsely advertising kitchen appliances as…
In June 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung for allegedly misleadingly advertising POWERbot vacuum cleaners as capable of being operated remotely using various devices when, according to the…
February 2018: A federal judge granted in part and denied in part Samsung’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint, dismissing the New Jersey consumer fraud state law claims finding that…
In February 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung Electronics America for allegedly falsely advertising that Samsung Galaxy S7 phones are water-resistant when, according to plaintiffs, they are not.…
August 2015: This case was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. after it was transferred to a judge hearing a related case (Case…
In November 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung Electronics America for allegedly deceptively advertising Smart TVs as having the capability to access the YouTube app directly from the…
January 2015: This case was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice, an amended version of the complaint can be refiled., the reasons for which have not been…
September 2017: This action was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled., the reasons for which have not been disclosed. November 2016: A federal…
In November 2016, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung for allegedly marketing televisions as “energy efficient” and “Energy Star” certified when, in reality, software automatically disables energy-saving features whenever…
In October 2016, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung for allegedly misleadingly concealing that its televisions use more energy than the Energy Guide labeling and advertising represent. (Coghlan et…
In September 2016, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung Electronics America for allegedly falsely advertising its Galaxy S7 cellphones as water resistant when such claims are not true. (Velasquez-Reyes…
In April 2016, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung for allegedly falsely marketing televisions as LED when, in reality, the televisions are LCD televisions that use light emitting diodes…
This ad hertz.
A phone that is only “water resistant” under the right circumstances.
How the advertising of a free tablet (mis)led two consumers to Best Buy over the holiday weekend.
Free tablet promotion caused consumer confusion by not adequately disclosing terms.
The uniforms, the phones, the names, and the hashtags.