TRENTON, N.J. (Legal Newsline) – Samsung is confused about a line change that class action lawyers are hoping to execute in a lawsuit over Galaxy smartphone performance.
Three plaintiffs filed the suit on March 11 but have since decided not to continue pursuing it, as Samsung pointed to an arbitration agreement that has been deemed enforceable by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in another case.
Lawyers at Seeger Weiss in New Jersey and Philadelphia represented the plaintiffs, who allege Samsung programmed its phones to cheat benchmark apps and create false perceptions regarding the performance of battery life.
Samsung’s June 24 motion to dismiss says the three original plaintiffs defaulted on the motion to compel arbitration by never responding. On June 10, Seeger Weiss filed documents to have two new plaintiffs – who bought their phones after the lawsuit was filed and supposedly opted out of the arbitration agreement - file an amended complaint.
Samsung wants the New Jersey federal judge hearing the case to strike the proposed amended complaint.
“The original three plaintiffs are not sponsoring the new complaint, which does not list them as plaintiffs and was not filed on their behalf,” Samsung’s motion says. “In fact, these plaintiffs have disappeared from the case altogether.
“If Ms. (Jannat Denise) Brito and Mr. (Jose Rosario) Jimenez wish to sue Samsung Electronics America, they may file their own lawsuit, but the Federal Rules do not allow them to take over a lawsuit from other parties who do not wish to pursue it.”
Samsung says the case should be dismissed with prejudice, or in the alternative be sent to arbitration.
“The three plaintiffs in this action, apparently recognizing that they had filed their claims in the wrong forum, have not responded to (Samsung’s) motion and thus conceded it,” the company says.
The case centers on Samsung's Game Optimizing Service app on S10, S20, S21 and S22 models.
The GOS app "throttles" processing power to extend battery life.
"Samsung's deception is quite simple: in an effort to remain competitive, Samsung promises to deliver both better, faster performance and better, longer battery life," the lawsuit says.
"However, knowing it cannot deliver as promised, Samsung intentionally programmed its devices to cheat benchmark apps, and to create false perceptions regarding the speed, performance and battery life of the devices."
Benchmark apps are performance-measuring tools used by reviewers and consumers to test speed and performance.
"Samsung's throttling manipulation was intended to address a defect in the design of its devices: the fact that the devices' batteries lacked the capacity and power delivery to keep up with the demands placed upon them by Samsung's hardware and software," the suit says.