updated 04:54 pm EST, Fri February 14, 2014
Says 'reasonable consumer' wouldn't expect Siri to work perfectly
A judge for the US District Court for the Northern District of California, Claudia Wilken, has dismissed a lawsuit claiming that Apple ads for the iPhone 4S were deceptive about the capabilities of Siri. In her ruling Wilken writes that the plaintiffs' claims depended on "non-actionable puffery," and failed to show evidence of fraud. A "reasonable consumer," she says, would not expect Siri to work perfectly all the time; the plaintiffs charged that Apple gave the impression Siri could handle any request instantly.
"Apple made no promise that Siri would operate without fail," Wilken comments. The ruling also complains about the timing of the lawsuits the case stems from, which were originally filed separately two years ago by Frank M. Fazio, Carlisa S. Hamagaki, Daniel M. Balassone, and Benjamin Swartzmann. Fazio filed suit on the same day he sent a letter to Apple about his intentions. Balassone and Swartzmann were similarly quick to act, filing their suit four days after a similar letter. In neither situation did the plaintiffs give Apple enough time to deal with allegations, Wilken argues.
Apple actually filed to dismiss the combined lawsuit in 2012, on the premise that the plaintiffs didn't "allege any supposed misrepresentation with particularity," or say when they were "exposed to the purportedly misleading advertisements, which ones they found material, how and why they were false, or which they relied upon in purchasing their iPhones." The case is being dismissed with prejudice, preventing the plaintiffs from filing more suits over the same topic.