Owlet Smart Sock Failure and Burns Class Action

The baby monitor that is at issue in this class action is not the traditional audio or video monitoring system that allows parents to see and hear their baby as it sleeps. It’s a sock that’s purportedly able to monitor heart rate and oxygen levels, made by Owlet Baby Care, Inc. But the complaint alleges that the sock gives false alarms and may sometimes burn babies’ feet.

The Nationwide Class for this action is all individuals in the US who bought an Owlet Smart Sock. Three subclasses have also been proposed, including a California Subclass, a CLRA (California Consumer Legal Remedies Act) Subclass, and an Implied Warranty Subclass.

The Smart Sock and Smart Sock 2 are not cheap, retailing for around $299. Unfortunately, the complaint claims that the device is not accurate, giving false alarms but not always providing an alarm in dangerous situations. 

One of the two plaintiffs, Amada Ruiz, put the Smart Sock on her baby for sleep in November 2018. In the first two weeks of use, the Smart Sock gave two “red alerts,” one telling Ruiz that her baby had low oxygen, the second telling her the baby had low oxygen and abnormal heart rate. Both times, Ruiz called 911, but the paramedics who came found both oxygen and heart rate normal. 

The other plaintiff, Marisela Arreola, had the opposite experience. She used the Smart Sock on her baby in November 2016. At one time, when she physically checked on her baby, she found her turning purple because of low oxygen levels. The pediatrician she took her daughter to confirmed that the baby’s oxygen levels were low. The following month, it happened again. This time, her daughter’s oxygen levels were so low, she was admitted to the ICU. The Smart Sock didn’t notice the problem at either time.

Arreola reported this to Owlet, which sent her a new “beacon” monitoring part. However, even after this, the Smart Sock failed to register a third incident, when her daughter had to be admitted to the hospital. 

The complaint also reproduces an online photo of the bottom of a baby’s small foot with a significant red patch and blister posted by a mother who claimed the Smart Sock had created the burn. Another user reported second-degree burns to her son’s foot.

The complaint alleges that the company markets the Smart Sock as safe and providing peace of mind for parents, but it points out that false alarms, burns, and the failure to register actual problem incidents do not have that effect.

Despite the problems, the complaint says, the company has not recalled the Smart Sock or Smart Sock 2 and it has failed to inform customers that the device is fallible and may in fact be harmful. 

The complaint alleges violations of California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act and its Business & Professions Code, breaches of warranties, and unjust enrichment.

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Consumer

Most Recent Case Event

Owlet Smart Sock Failure and Burns Complaint

April 12, 2019

The baby monitor that is at issue in this class action is not the traditional audio or video monitoring system that allows parents to see and hear their baby as it sleeps. It’s a sock that’s purportedly able to monitor heart rate and oxygen levels, made by Owlet Baby Care, Inc. But the complaint alleges that the sock gives false alarms and may sometimes burn babies’ feet.

owlet_baby_monitor_complaint.pdf

Case Event History

Owlet Smart Sock Failure and Burns Complaint

April 12, 2019

The baby monitor that is at issue in this class action is not the traditional audio or video monitoring system that allows parents to see and hear their baby as it sleeps. It’s a sock that’s purportedly able to monitor heart rate and oxygen levels, made by Owlet Baby Care, Inc. But the complaint alleges that the sock gives false alarms and may sometimes burn babies’ feet.

owlet_baby_monitor_complaint.pdf
Tags: Baby Monitor, Defective Product