Thanks to an Illinois federal judge, Apple’s legal department has one less thing to worry about. Earlier this week, U.S. District Court Judge Matthew F. Kennelly granted the company’s motion for a summary judgment in a class-action lawsuit brought by disgruntled iPhone purchaser Jose Trujillo.
In July 2007, less than a month after the iPhone was released in the United States, Trujillo filed a complaint against Apple and iPhone carrier AT&T for deceptive advertising. He argued that the companies engaged in “purposeful and fraudulent concealment” of the fact that iPhone purchasers were required to pay $89.95 to get the device’s battery replaced.
Based on the expected life of the battery — 300 to 400 charge cycles — Trujillo described the battery-replacement fee as an “annual charge,” and asked the court to certify a class and appoint Trujillo and his attorney to represent the class.
Trujillo and his attorney may have been motivated in part by a successful class-action lawsuit against Apple for misstatements about the life and durability of the battery in its popular iPod music player. In that case, the plaintiffs alleged that Apple intentionally misled consumers by stating that the iPod battery would play for up to 10 hours and last the lifetime of the device. Apple agreed to a settlement extending the iPod’s warranty from one to two years and provided a $50 credit to purchasers who had already replaced the device’s battery.
In Trujillo’s case, however, the court found that Apple provided adequate warning to consumers about the iPhone’s limited battery life and replacement policy.
“Apple disclosed on the outside of the iPhone package that the device’s ‘[b]attery has limited recharge cycles and may eventually need to be replaced by Apple service provider,'” Kennelly ruled. “Though this was in small print, Trujillo does not argue in his response to…