Two Massachusetts residents are suing a popular battery company alleging it misrepresented potential battery leakage in its products.
Lauren Carlson and Jamal Yusuf are asking for class status for all Massachusetts consumers who purchased the Duracell Battery brand between June 1, 2012 and the present. The lawsuit names Duracell's parent companies, The Gillette Company and Proctor & Gamble Company, as defendants.
At issue is the “Duralock ring” label displayed on battery packaging, which states the batteries would be guaranteed for 10 years while in storage and not being used. Duracell began using the “Duralock Power Preserve Technology” on June 1, 2012.
The plaintiffs claim the batteries leak when being used in “a normal and expected manner.”
“Defendants conspicuously failed to disclose that the Duracell Batteries leak when not in use and the leakage can damage any device that the batteries are stored in,” the lawsuit claims.
The plaintiffs state they purchased the Duracell batteries based on the 10-year guarantee, but would not have bought the product if it had known about the potential leakage.
The lawsuit also claims Duracell produced television and radio commercials advertising its 10-year guarantee, but did not disclose that batteries can leak when they are in some devices that are not being used.
The lawsuit was filed by attorney Erica Mirabella of Mirabella Law LLC.
United States District Court District of Massachusetts case number 1:14-cv-14201