HP Limited Warranty

September 2015: The parties agreed to dismiss this lawsuit When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled.. The reasons for the dismissal have not been disclosed.

August 2015: A federal judge granted the company’s motion to dismiss finding that the complaint did not clearly state claims of fraud and did not state claims for relief under California law. The judge gave plaintiffs until October 20, 2015 to amend the complaint to more clearly explain fraud claims and show a connection to California.

April 2015: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Hewlett-Packard Company for, among other things, allegedly misleadingly marketing a one-year warranty for HP hardware products without adequately disclosing that consumers do not receive a full one-year warranty because the company begins the one-year period before the consumer purchases the product. (Adkins et al v. Hewlett-Packard Company and Does 1-50, Case No. 15-cv-2035, N. D. CA.)

For more information about other class-action lawsuits filed against Hewlett-Packard and TINA.org’s coverage of the company, click here.

Class-Action Tracker

HP Ink and Toner Cartridges

Class Action

HP Ink and Toner Cartridges

Allegations: Failing to disclose that firmware updates would make non-HP cartridges incompatible with HP printers

HP Care Packs

Class Action

HP Care Packs

Allegations: Falsely representing that Care Packs are “Risk Free”

HP Pavilion Laptops

Class Action

HP Pavilion Laptops

Allegations: Misleadingly representing that the laptop parts are adequately tested and will function when the company does not test batteries for certain issues and users may experience battery performance issues

HP, Envy, and Pavilion Laptops

Class Action

HP, Envy, and Pavilion Laptops

Allegations: Misleadingly advertising products as durable and portable laptops that open and close when they actually fail to work as advertised due to a defect

HP Envy 13 Ultrabook Laptops with NVIDIA GeForce MX150 Graphics Cards

Class Action