September 26, 2011
A federal court denies a class action certification accusing Epson of misrepresenting the NX printer series.
A federal court has denied class certification in a case accusing Epson of misrepresenting how the NX series of printers functioned with ink cartridges, failing to disclose and misrepresented the features of the printer.
In 2009, plaintiff Rogers purchased a “Stylus NX 200”, claiming that the decision was based on part on a statement made on the box: “Replace only the colour you need with individual ink cartridges”, and understood it to mean that the printer would only require a black cartridge to print black text, although the printer requires all cartridges to function.
The court is stated as unconvinced that the assumed members of the class had standing to pursue their claims in court under Article III: “a plaintiff must present an injury that is concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent; fairly traceable to the defendant’s challenged action; and redressable by a favourable ruling.”
As such, “there cannot be a casual connection between the consumer’s injury (the money spent on the printer) and Epson’s alleged misconduct (the purported deceptive advertising)”. Statutory interpretations cannot permit a federal class action to proceed where class members lack Article III standing.