The first named plaintiff in the suit says she received the Owlet Smart Sock 2 as a gift around August 2018.
Want more legal news like this? Sign up for 's newsletter here. The complaint cites a post from Owlet’s Facebook page in which a parent displayed a picture of her baby’s foot showing a “large burn mark” that she apparently discovered after removing the Smart Sock. On top of all that, the lawsuit also claims the Smart Sock can malfunction and burn babies’ feet during normal use.
The device, the suit says, completely fails to perform the function for which it was designed and advertised, leaving parents without any of the “peace of mind” they expected in return for the hundreds they handed over for the monitor. The case claims there are instances in which the Smart Sock should have alerted parents to a baby’s abnormal heart rate or oxygen levels, but didn’t. So, if the Smart Sock reports false alarms so often, you’d think it would at least be pretty accurate when a baby’s vitals are actually abnormal, right? Not according to the lawsuit.
The false alarms apparently happen so often that Owlet, fully aware of the issue, has referred to them as “false alarm fatigue.” Despite coining a term for the Smart Sock’s apparent inaccuracy, Owlet, the suit says, hasn’t said a word about it to consumers. The suit says the monitors tend to report false alarms, often multiple times per night, that fill parents with fear and anxiety about their babies’ health – a far cry from the “peace of mind” that the company promised. Owlet allegedly promises in advertising and marketing materials that the monitor, dubbed the Owlet Smart Sock, will provide parents with “peace of mind” by giving them “insight into the health and well-being of their infant.” What Does the Lawsuit Claim?Īccording to the 39-page complaint, Owlet Smart Socks are wildly inaccurate. If those levels fall outside of a preset range, the device is supposed to send an alert to a parent's smartphone via a Bluetooth-enabled base station placed near the baby. has sold a wearable baby monitor that purportedly uses “pulse oximetry technology” to track babies’ heart rates and oxygen levels. Since 2015, defendant Owlet Baby Care, Inc. The Owlet Smart Sock: What’s This All About? Instead, the company continues to use “every opportunity” to justify the Smart Sock’s high price tag of $299, a “hefty premium” compared to similar products. Owlet Smart Sock baby monitors are the subject of a recent proposed class action lawsuit that claims the devices do not monitor babies’ heart rates and oxygen levels as promised and can burn infants’ feet even when used properly.ĭespite receiving numerous customer complaints about false alarms and the monitors’ tendency to malfunction, Owlet, the case says, has refused to address the issue or warn consumers about the product’s apparent defects. The plaintiffs have leave to file an amended lawsuit by June 30, 2020. “In sum, Plaintiffs fail to allege what Defendant should have disclosed, what a reasonable consumer would have expected from a pulse oximeter, and whether there was a difference between the two,” the order reads. More specifically, Judge Nielson wrote the plaintiffs failed to sufficiently allege that their experiences with the product are different than what a reasonable consumer would expect and indicative of a defect such that the baby monitor is not fit for ordinary use. stated that aside from the “vagueness and inconsistency” with which the plaintiffs described their issues with the Smart Sock baby monitors, the consumers failed to allege “sufficient factual content” to support their claims. In a 14-page order granting in part Owlet Baby Care’s motion to dismiss, United States District Judge Howard C. The proposed class action lawsuit detailed on this page has been dismissed without prejudice.
0 kommentar(er)
