|
Public Justice has objected to
a settlement involving Sharper Image's Ionic Breeze
air purifiers, which emit harmful levels of ozone. |
Arguing that a proposed class
action settlement involving Sharper Image's "Ionic Breeze"
air purifiers "looks more like a marketing tool than a fair
deal," Public Justice has filed objections to the settlement
and called on the marketing giant for a "more serious"
response to studies that show the devices emit harmful
levels of ozone.
The proposed
settlement of Figueroa v. Sharper Image, which is
pending in a Miami federal court, consists of a $19 coupon that can be
redeemed off the sale of another Sharper Image branded
product. It also gives class members the right to obtain an
"OzoneGuard" that may or may not ameliorate some of the
adverse health effects associated with use of the Ionic
Breeze.
Public
Justice's objections, which were filed on behalf of a class
member who stopped using the devices after learning of their
health risks, argue that the settlement is unfair and should
not be approved. Attorneys General in 26 states and the District of Columbia also filed a brief opposing the
settlement.
"The fact
that the only way in which class members can obtain value
from their coupons is by spending more money at
Sharper Image raises serious questions about the fairness of
this agreement," said lead counsel Amy
Radon, Public Justice's Goldberg, Waters &
Kraus Fellow.
"We
anticipate that few class members will be inclined to return
to Sharper Image after learning about the debacle that
occurred with respect to these Ionic Breeze machines. And
the OzoneGuard, which only fits some of the Ionic Breeze
models included in the settlement, has never been proven to
cure the defects in these expensive machines."
The
settlement arises out of a national controversy regarding
adverse health effects associated with the Ionic Breeze,
which have been bought by over 3 million consumers
nationwide. In 2003 and 2005, Consumer Reports
reported that the "air purifiers" were ineffective and
emitted harmful levels of ozone that can aggravate breathing
problems. Those reports prompted several lawsuits against
Sharper Image, including Figueroa. If the settlement
is approved, it will put an end to all class-wide litigation
involving economic injuries caused by the devices.
"I spent over
$500 on two Ionic Breeze air purifiers in reliance on
Sharper Image's advertising, only to learn that they render
my environment unhealthy," said objecting class member La
Sarmiento, a massage therapist from
Washington, DC. "This is particularly unacceptable to me given my
profession. I cannot allow a place of healing to become a
cause of health problems for my clients, my partner, or
myself."
The
settlement originally provided that class members could
receive a $19 coupon and the right to purchase an OzoneGuard
that fits some Ionic Breeze floor models. The day after
Public Justice filed its objections, the settlement was
amended to give class members who can prove that they
purchased an Ionic Breeze the right to receive a free
OzoneGuard. This new relief, according to Public Justice,
does not cure the defects in the settlement, because (1)
class members who cannot produce proof of purchase are not
entitled to the free guards; (2) the guards only fit some of
the Ionic Breezes included in the settlement; and (3) the
settling parties have never proven that the guards fix the
problems with the air purifiers, which cost hundreds of
dollars and are known to pose serious health risks.
A hearing on the matter has
been scheduled for August 16, 2007, where Public Justice
will present the objections to this settlement on behalf of
Ms. Sarmiento. Counsel for Ms. Sarmiento consist of Ms.
Radon, Public Justice Staff Attorney Leslie Brueckner,
Public Justice Executive Director Arthur Bryant, and Theodore J. Leopold of Ricci~Leopold in
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Both the
Public Justice objections and the Attorneys General
amicus brief are available on our website at
http://www.publicjustice.net/briefs_documents.htm.
