Lawsuit Alleges Defect In Lenovo Yoga 700 Series “2-in1” Laptop/Tablets With Dual-Hinge System
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making consumers aware that on April 27, 2020, a class action lawsuit was filed in United States District Court for the District of Maryland on behalf of a class of current and former owners of Lenovo-brand 700-series “2-in-1” Yoga laptop/tablets equipped with a dual-hinge system. The lawsuit seeks “to redress Defendant Lenovo (United States) Inc.’s . . . purposeful and knowing marketing, sale and warranting of defective Class Devices,” devices which include the Lenovo Yoga 700, Lenovo Yoga 710, Lenovo Yoga 720, and Lenovo Yoga 730 models.
According to the complaint, “. . . ‘2-in-1’ tablet/laptops . . . sell at a premium relative to traditional tablets. According to Lenovo, [the specific] Class Devices utilize a purportedly revolutionary dual-hinge system that allows consumers to use [the devices] in one of four different configurations as either a traditional laptop or a touchscreen tablet simply by folding one of the device’s surfaces along its two hinges.” Allegedly, consumers were not aware that
. . . the dual-hinge system Lenovo utilizes in Class Devices is defective in that it prematurely and unexpectedly cracks and fails, rendering the hinges inoperable and prohibiting Plaintiffs and Class members from changing the configuration of their Devices. The Defect thereby deprives owners of the Devices’ defining feature: the ability to use their Device as either a tablet or a laptop (the ‘Defect’).
The Defect not only renders the hinges inoperable; it also damages other Device components. As the Defect manifests and the hinges begin to crack and separate from the Devices, optical cables within may begin to fray and cause screens begin to flicker before the hinge ultimately comes loose and causes the plastic surrounding the screen (or the screen itself) to crack, rendering Class Devices utterly useless. [Emphasis added.]
If, according to the complaint, “. . . Plaintiffs and the Class [had] known about the Defect at the time of purchase, they would have paid substantially less for their . . . [d]evices, or would not have purchased them and avoided the significant out-of-pocket costs they have or will incur to repair or replace Class Devices once the Defect manifests.”