Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.

Motorola Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Bluetooth-Related Hearing Loss

Report Fraud
Case ID: 4945 | Consumer Products | 11/03/2006

A California man has filed a class action lawsuit against Motorola, Inc, in Cook County United States District Court. His claim is that Motorola, makers of popular bluetooth headsets, has failed to adequately warn consumers of potential hearing loss from using the headsets.

Motorola has manufactured and distributed many different models of Bluetooth Headsets, including the HS830, the H3, the H300, the H500, the H605, the H700, the HS805, the HS815, the HS820, the HS850, and the HT820 (collectively the “Headsets"). Each Headset is defective in design and not sufficiently adorned with adequate warnings regarding the likelihood of noise induced hearing loss which can occur if the Headsets are used at the higher volume settings over a period of time, a condition which has no cure or treatment.

Use of Bluetooth headsets is becoming increasingly popular among the consuming public because of the ease and convenience associated with the technology. According to the Insight Research Corporation ("IRC"), "nearly 65 percent of Americans, or 195 million people, are expected to be mobile phone subscribers by the close of 2005." IRC has also reported that "as users become more used to the convenience of cellular, long distance and local usage is shifting from wireline to cellular. The average wireline residential toll minutes of use (MOUs) have been dropping at a compounded rate of 15 percent since 2000, while wireless interstate MOUs per user grew at a compounded rate of nearly 40 percent during the same period. According to one FCC study, on the wireless side, the percentage of interstate residential minutes has increased from 16 percent to 26 percent of all wireless minutes." As more and more people switch from using landlines to using mobile phones in order to accommodate their telecommunication needs, more and more consumers are spending hours per day on the mobile phone. Such increased usage is particularly dramatic with respect to individuals using a mobile phone for business purposes.

Motorola's Headsets have volume controls which have the capacity to produce sounds with time weighted averages exceeding 85 decibels, with sound often peaking in excess of 100 decibels. The Headsets are designed in such a manner that the consumer is deprived of any ability to determine the decibel level of the sound being emitted from the Headset. In a test recently performed by the American Speech-Hearing-Language Association, Motorola's H700 model Headset produced decibel levels of up to 106 decibels at the high setting. According to the time weighted average standards suggested by such organizations as NIOSH and Dangerous Decibels, a consumer could suffer NIHL if exposed to such sounds for between only three to four minutes a day.

Motorola sold the Headsets with a booklet setting forth safety information relating to use of the Headsets. However, Defendants omitted and concealed from consumers any safety information pertaining to the Headsets' propensity for causing noise induced hearing loss. Defendants also omitted and concealed from the consuming public information advising that the Headsets produced noise at decibel levels exceeding 85 db, and even exceeding 100 db.

Millions of consumers have had their hearing put at risk by Motorola's conduct. Because the Headset transmits sound to only one ear, extraneous sound from the environment is simultaneously being heard by the Headset user from the other ear. Such extraneous sound makes it more difficult for the Headset user to isolate and hear the sound being transmitted over the Headset. The Headset user is thus required to maximize the volume of the Headset in order to overcome the extraneous noise being heard in the other ear.

The lawsuit seeks to represents persons that have experienced hearing loss that may be due to BlueTooth use.


At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints.

Other Consumer Products Cases of Interest

The Enterprise Mobility Company filed a lawsuit against Harvard Battery, Inc. and Global Technology Systems, Inc. d/b/a Honeywell Batteries for copyright, design patent and utility patent violations. The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, alleges both companies are selling batteries that infringe Symbol's intellectual property.
 
British Airways and Virgin have been hit with a potentially damaging and expensive class-action lawsuit over an alleged price-fixing conspiracy. The filing of the lawsuit follows an admission by BA that it was under investigation by the Office of Fair Trading and the American Department of Justice. The probe centers on allegations of price-fixing related to fuel surcharges on long-haul flights.
 
Rewards Network Inc., which provides marketing services and loyalty programs to the restaurant industry, reached a preliminary agreement to settle a class action lawsuit brought against the company in California for up to $28 million.
 
The parties have reached a settlement valued at $104.6 million in a class action filed against Microsoft Corporation on behalf of consumers who, between January 12, 1996, and December 31, 2002, resided in Arizona and indirectly purchased Microsoft operating system, productivity suite, spreadsheet, or word processing software for use in Arizona. The action alleged that Microsoft violated Arizona's antitrust and unfair competition laws by illegitimately using its monopoly power. Persons eligible to take part in the settlement may contact attorneys for the class for more information
 
Several class actions have been filed against UK prepared food manufacturer Hibernia Foods, PLC, (OTC:HIBNY.PK) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between August 2, 1999, and October 21, 2003. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities.
 
A class action lawsuit has been filed in the Middle District Court of Florida against Lowe's Companies, Inc., a North Carolina based home improvement store with 1,000 stores in 45 states, for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Class members seek an order enjoining the Company from continuing their current pay policies, compensatory damages, attorney's fees, interest and costs.
 
Become a LawCash Member - FREE!
'Find Money' E-Book
Weekly Email Alerts




privacy policy
YouNewz Beta
IT'S FREE

Report

Report Newz and easily upload your own newzworthy photos from your cell phone or computer to the web.

Share

Quickly share your photos with family, friends, co-workers, or the world with your own Newzpaper.

Read

Instantly find Newz and photos from other YouNewzers and read other YouNewzers Newzpapers.
 
Class Action Lawsuit Center || Product Recall Center || Consumer Complaint Center || About LawCash Link Exchange
Privacy Policy || Legal Policies || Terms & Conditions || Website Advertising Policy || Site Map || Top Lawsuits
LawCash® is a service of nola3, llc
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.

[ Home ]
LawCash
login
Justice is a click away.