“We don’t stop at ‘good enough’, because we care about our customers and employees’ health and their environments. We strive to minimize any potential adverse effects on the health of our customers, employees, or to the environment that may arise from products containing hazardous substances or chemicals used at our manufacturing sites.”

💡 Samsung made explicit promises to minimize adverse health effects from hazardous substances while selling watchbands containing toxic PFAS.

“The elevated levels of PFAS present in these Products are particularly hazardous given the intended prolonged and direct skin contact and continuous wearing of Defendant’s Products – all day or all night, every day – as directed by Defendant to monitor consumers’ health, wellness, and sleep. The intended wearing of the watches on the underside of the wrist, combined with body heat and thin layer of skin, makes these toxic chemicals particularly prone to absorption.”

💡 The watchbands’ design and Samsung’s usage recommendations maximize dermal absorption of carcinogenic forever chemicals.

“[the D-Buckle Hybrid Eco-Leather Band] contains a blend of FKM and material partially derived from plant-based sources, making it both durable and environmentally conscious.”

💡 Samsung marketed bands as environmentally conscious while the FKM (fluoroelastomer) component contains massive PFAS levels.

“According to the study, the median concentration for samples with detectable PFHxA, 773 ng/g, is very high in comparison to other recent studies, which, combined, had observed PFHxA concentrations up to 199 ng/g.”

💡 Independent scientific testing confirmed Samsung’s bands contain PFAS at levels nearly four times higher than previously documented in other products.

“Start your wellness journey. Buckle up for all-day action. This sporty band will accompany you in your outdoor workouts and daily activities. Galaxy Watch Active2’s straps are made of a flexible fluoroelastomer that’s gentle on the wrist.”

💡 Samsung used health and wellness language to market toxic watchbands, directly contradicting the products’ true hazardous nature.

“PFAS are highly toxic, bioaccumulative, and persistent organic pollutants, and as such are commonly described as ‘forever chemicals.’ Under normal conditions, it can take over 1,000 years for some PFAS to degrade.”

💡 The chemicals in Samsung’s watchbands will contaminate the environment and human bodies for millennia.

“In developing the unreasonably hazardous and dangerous Products, which Defendant markets for everyday wear, Defendant knew or, at a minimum, should have known the danger the Products carry to human health, especially for Products with the daily/nightly and prolonged contact with the skin on the underside of the wrist, where body’s absorption rate of the toxic chemicals is heightened.”

💡 Samsung knew or should have known about PFAS dangers but chose to sell toxic products anyway.

“Current peer-reviewed scientific studies demonstrate that PFAS cause negative reproductive effects, negative developmental effects, or delays in children, increased risk of cancers, reduced ability of the body’s immune system to fight infections, interference with the body’s natural hormones, and increased risk of obesity. Even at extremely low exposure levels, PFAS cause serious health effects, including suppression of the immune system, endocrine disruption, accelerated puberty, liver damage, and thyroid changes.”

💡 Scientific consensus confirms the severe health consequences of PFAS exposure, which Samsung concealed from consumers.

“Plaintiff and similarly situated consumers would not have purchased the Products or would not have paid as much for the Products, had the Material Omission been disclosed and/or had Plaintiff otherwise known that the Challenged Representations were not true—i.e., that the Products contain toxic chemicals, PFAS, posing an unreasonable safety hazard to human health and environment, and are thus, not safe for everyday wear and prolonged use.”

💡 Samsung extracted premium prices based on false safety claims, causing consumers to overpay for hazardous products.

“Worse, the presence of excessive PFAS in the Products was and is avoidable, as it was also reported that several bands on the market are made of different materials that do not contain excessive levels of PFAS. Defendant also could have chosen not to expose the health-conscious consumers it targets to the harmful toxins, by using different material for its watchbands, but it elected not to.”

💡 Samsung chose toxic materials over available safe alternatives to reduce costs while marketing health benefits.

“PFAS can be released into the environment during the chemical manufacturing process and through chemical additives that are applied to the finished product. Since PFAS cannot be removed from water through standard water treatment processes, they move from water supplies into agricultural fields. Once PFAS are cycled back into the soil, crops readily sequester the chemical, causing biomagnification up the food chain, furthering toxic accumulation in animals and humans.”

💡 Samsung’s watchbands create a permanent contamination cycle affecting water, soil, food supply, and entire ecosystems.

“Research confirms that PFAS can be absorbed by the skin and enter the bloodstream, and thus, dermal exposure can be a significant source of exposure to PFAS. This is of particular concern to smartwatch users, which are often worn for many hours a day, including overnight, to track sleep patterns and other health data.”

💡 Scientific research confirms that PFAS from watchbands enter the bloodstream through skin contact during prolonged wear.

“Initially, Plaintiff was wearing the Purchased Product nearly all day, and after several weeks of prolonged use, he developed a burning rash where the Product touches the skin.”

💡 Real health consequences emerged from wearing Samsung’s toxic watchband as directed for wellness monitoring.

“In the U.S. and many other countries, PFAS remain loosely regulated at the consumer product level. While the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been pushing new guidelines to limit PFAS in drinking water, it does not comprehensively regulate the presence of PFAS in wearables or consumer electronics accessories.”

💡 Samsung exploited the lack of consumer product regulations to sell PFAS-laden watchbands without disclosure requirements.

“This not only harms consumers but it also gives Defendant an unfair competitive advantage over those in the market who decline to affirmatively promise health or environmental sustainability, or who deliver on those promises by using the otherwise widely-available materials not containing excessive levels of toxic substances.”

💡 Samsung undercut responsible competitors by using toxic materials while falsely claiming the same health and environmental benefits.