Consumer Fraud

Samsung M Series TVs Allegedly Falsely Marketed as Mini LED

Samsung M Series TVs Allegedly Falsely Marketed as Mini LED — Consumer Fraud class action lawsuit

Case Overview

A California consumer initiated a class action lawsuit against Samsung Electronics America Inc., alleging that the company falsely advertised its 2026 M70H, M80H, and M90H televisions as featuring Mini LED technology. The complaint states that despite marketing features like “Mini LED precision” and “Mini LED HDR,” the televisions allegedly utilize an ordinary LED backlight instead of the smaller, independently controlled local dimming zones characteristic of true Mini LED technology.

The allegations center on fraudulent misrepresentation and concealment, as the suit claims Samsung prominently advertised the Mini LED features while burying disclosures in fine print that the technology was software-based rather than hardware-based. The lawsuit cites independent testing that allegedly found no local dimming in the M70H and M80H models, and the plaintiffs assert claims under various state laws, including California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act and False Advertising Law.

The proposed nationwide class covers purchasers of the M70H, M80H, or M90H from January 1, 2026, onward, with a separate subclass for California buyers. The plaintiffs are seeking damages, restitution, and an injunction to stop the misleading advertising. The plaintiff is represented by Philip L. Fraietta of Bursor & Fisher P.A. and Thiago M. Coelho of Wilshire Law Firm PLC.

Who May Qualify

Consumers who purchased new Samsung M70H, M80H, or M90H televisions from January 1, 2026, through the present.

Frequently Asked Questions

What specific models are at the center of the allegations?

The lawsuit focuses on Samsung’s 2026 M70H, M80H, and M90H televisions, which the plaintiff claims were marketed as Mini LED models.

What legal claims are being asserted against Samsung?

The lawsuit asserts claims for fraudulent misrepresentation, concealment, negligent misrepresentation, breach of express warranty, unjust enrichment, and violations of California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act, False Advertising Law, and Unfair Competition Law.

Who is representing the plaintiff in this case?

The plaintiff is represented by Philip L. Fraietta of Bursor & Fisher P.A. and Thiago M. Coelho of Wilshire Law Firm PLC.

Related Cases

Venmo Users Sue PayPal Over Alleged Disclosure of Private Financial Data — Consumer Fraud class action lawsuit

Venmo Users Sue PayPal Over Alleged Disclosure of Private Financial Data

Current
Consumer Fraud
A group of consumers has filed a class action lawsuit against PayPal, which operates the Venmo payment platform, alleging that the company improperly shared private user financial data with third parties without the users' consent.
Walmart Settlement Over Expired Infant Formula and Drug Products — Consumer Fraud class action lawsuit

Walmart Settlement Over Expired Infant Formula and Drug Products

Past
Consumer Fraud
Walmart agreed to a $16 million settlement after prosecutors alleged the retailer sold expired infant formula and over-the-counter drugs to consumers in California. The settlement mandates that Walmart implement strict compliance programs to prevent the sale of expired date-sensitive products in its California stores.
GoFundMe Accused of Sneaking Default Tips onto Donations — Consumer Fraud class action lawsuit

GoFundMe Accused of Sneaking Default Tips onto Donations

Current
Consumer Fraud
Two donors filed a class action lawsuit alleging that GoFundMe used deceptive website design to automatically add optional tips to donations without the donors' explicit consent. The plaintiffs claim the company misrepresents its funding sources by suggesting it relies heavily on tips while allegedly collecting transaction fees from charities.