`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`John Guerriero, individually and on behalf of all
`others similarly situated,
`
`Case No. 7:21-cv-02618
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`- against -
`
`Class Action Complaint
`
`Sony Electronics Inc.,
`
`
`
`Defendant
`
`Jury Trial Demanded
`
`Plaintiff alleges upon information and belief, except for allegations pertaining to plaintiff,
`
`which are based on personal knowledge:
`
`1.
`
`Sony Electronics Inc. (“defendant”) manufactures, markets and sells the a7iii camera
`
`(“Product”) described as “the vanguard of the mirrorless camera movement because they’re the
`
`most accessible full-frame system[s] on the market.”1
`
`I. Mirrorless Cameras
`
`2.
`
`Before digital electronic sensors, all cameras used film to capture images.
`
`
`1 Stefan Etienne, Sony A7 III and A7R III Review: Mirrorless Magic, The Verge, March 30, 2018.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 2 of 14
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Cameras contained an inside mirror to reflect an image into an optical viewfinder.
`
`The viewfinder shows the area that will be included in a photograph.2
`
`5. Once the shutter opens, light passes through the lens.
`
`
`
`
`
`6.
`
`The mirror then moves out of the path of the light hitting the film when the shutter
`
`button is released, creating the image.
`
`7.
`
`The shutter is the component that retracts for a specific period of time, allowing light
`
`to pass through the lens, hitting a photographic film or a light-sensitive sensor to expose a scene
`
`and permanently register it.
`
`8. When the scene is registered, that shutter goes back down.
`
`
`2 Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopedia. "Viewfinder". Encyclopedia Britannica, 19 Sep. 2019.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 3 of 14
`
`9.
`
`Camera shutters are measured by actuations, which is the number of pictures taken
`
`with the camera.
`
`10. This is a relevant metric because for each picture, the shutter flaps open and closed
`
`for an exposure.
`
`11. A mirrorless camera has all the attributes of previous generations of cameras but
`
`without a mirror.3
`
`
`
`12. The absence of a mirror increases the camera’s speed and allows it to be smaller and
`
`lighter than a traditional digital camera (“DSLR” or digital single-lens reflex camera).
`
`13. The a7iii is smaller, lighter, and more durable than its DSLR counterpart, which
`
`contributes to its higher cost – approximately $2,000.00.
`
`14. Unfortunately for many purchasers of the a7iii, mechanical problems with the shutter
`
`have rendered the cameras unusable provided they do not pay over $500 for repair to an authorized
`
`service center.
`
`15. Mirrorless cameras are preferred by many professional photographers because they
`
`are quieter, which provides less distractions when photographing events like weddings.4
`
`
`3 Mirrorless Interchangeable-lens Camera or “MILC”; Canon New Zealand, Mirrorless or DSLR Cameras: Which is
`Right for You?.
`4 Vincent Tabora, DSLR vs. Mirrorless, Medium.com, Oct 14, 2019.
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 4 of 14
`
`II. The a7iii’s Shutter Problem
`
`16. The shutter life expectancy on the a7iii is 200,000 actuations.
`
`17. However, numerous users report shutter failures far below 200,000 but between
`
`10,000 and 50,000 for most of the users who experienced this.5
`
`18. While the a7iii is generally sold with a one-year warranty, shutter failure occurs
`
`randomly, often outside of the warranty period.
`
`19. The result is that purchasers must pay approximately $500-$650 for repair and
`
`replacement of the shutter mechanism.
`
`20. The shutter failure manifests in a consistent way.
`
`21. Prior to shutter failure, users report hearing an atypical shutter sound, followed by
`
`the screen turning black and displaying the following message: “Camera Error. Turn off then on.”
`
`
`
`
`
`22. However, following these instructions often will not solve the problem.
`
`23. Users who experience the shutter failure have resorted to removing and reinserting
`
`the camera’s battery, but this is also ineffective.
`
`
`5 We want Sony A7III to be recalled for Shutter replacement, Change.org petition, 2019.
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 5 of 14
`
`24. When a user removes the lens, the shutter is closed and stuck.
`
`25.
`
`In most instances, the shutter has become detached, as shown through the numerous
`
`
`
`
`
`a7iii users who shared pictures of their broken shutters on the internet.
`
`26. Several explanations have been advanced for why the a7iii shutters fail relatively
`
`
`
`
`
`frequently and before the expected number of actuations.
`
`27. These include the observation that the shutter blade catches on the front edge as it
`
`moves down in taking a picture.
`
`28. This is because the blades are positioned farther forward, so they “catch” and fail to
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 6 of 14
`
`fully clear.
`
`29. Moreover, the front curtain shutter material is of limited strength, causing it to break.
`
`30. Additionally, the shutter is unusually susceptible to disruption by small particles,
`
`even dust, which can cause the blades out of alignment. from
`
`31. Many users, out of caution, have resorted to using the camera with the electronic
`
`front curtain shutter (“EFCS”) off, which may decrease the chance of a shutter malfunction.
`
`32. When the EFCS is on, it “shortens the time lag between shutter releases and helps
`
`reduce shutter noise when taking pictures.”6
`
`33. However, the EFCS is one of the main reasons for purchasing the a7iii and having to
`
`refrain from using it diminishes the camera’s utility and value.
`
`34. For users whose shutters do not fail completely, they nonetheless experience
`
`abnormal banding that is evident only when using the mechanical shutter.
`
`35. The cause is the failure of the rear curtain to clear properly.
`
`36. Though users and do-it-yourself repair enthusiasts have offered ways to unbind the
`
`shutter, these can cause damage to the shutter.
`
`37. Additionally, the problem is likely to reoccur, and the user will have any warranty
`
`claim denied for having caused “physical damage” in attempting to fix the shutter failure.
`
`38.
`
`In fact, Sony has denied warranty coverage to numerous a7iii users on these grounds.
`
`39. Sony has also denied coverage to those who experienced shutter failure when their
`
`claims were submitted outside of the limited warranty period.
`
`40. Sony has been aware of the shutter failure on the a7iii since shortly after its release
`
`around 2017.
`
`
`6 What Is the Electronic Front Curtain Shutter Function?, Sony.com, March 23, 2021.
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 7 of 14
`
`41. Sony is aware of the percentage of this model which experience premature shutter
`
`failure but has declined to act such as issuing a recall or covering the faulty shutters.
`
`Parties
`
`42. Plaintiff John Guerriero is a citizen of Yonkers, Westchester County, New York.
`
`43. Defendant Sony Electronics Inc. is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of
`
`business in San Diego, California.
`
`44. Defendant is one of the premier manufacturers of electronics in the world, from
`
`stereos to televisions to videogame systems.
`
`45. Plaintiff John Guerriero purchased the Product from Amazon.com in or around 2019.
`
`46. Plaintiff and/or class members experienced the shutter failures and contacted and/or
`
`attempted to contact Defendant to remedy this but were not successful because of Defendant’s
`
`conduct.
`
`47. The claims of Plaintiff and/or class members accrued when they suffered the injury
`
`of the shutter failures and/or the diminution of value caused by the latent defect.
`
`48. Defendant is estopped from asserting a statute of limitations defense.
`
`49. The claims of Plaintiff and/or class members are subject to equitable tolling and
`
`equitable estoppel.
`
`50. Defendant’s fraudulent concealment caused Plaintiff and/or class members to lack
`
`knowledge of their causes of action.
`
`51. Plaintiff and/or class members were delayed in filing this action due to Defendant’s
`
`wrongful conduct.
`
`52. Despite due diligence, Plaintiff and/or class members were unable to discover facts
`
`that would allow them to bring their claims sooner.
`
`53. Defendant’s actions of suggesting remedial measures other than shutter repair and
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 8 of 14
`
`replacement, induced Plaintiff and/or class members to refrain from commencing the action
`
`sooner.
`
`54. Plaintiff and/or class members did not have enough information to commence the
`
`action sooner because Defendant failed to disclose that the cause of the issue was due to the lower
`
`quality materials used in the shutter and assured them there were no problems with the shutters,
`
`when it knew this was not true.
`
`55. Defendant’s post-sale handling of the warranty claims and inquiries of Plaintiff
`
`and/or class members were deceptive and misleading because Defendant and its customer service
`
`representatives told Plaintiff and/or class members that the issue could be fixed by resetting their
`
`cameras, they damaged the cameras and/or there were no reports of similar issues.
`
`56. Plaintiff and class members will purchase the Product again if they are assured it
`
`would not suffer from premature shutter failures.
`
`Jurisdiction and Venue
`
`57.
`
`Jurisdiction is proper pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”)
`
`as the amount in controversy is at least $5 million and there is minimal diversity. 28 U.S.C. §
`
`1332(d)(2).
`
`58. Plaintiff John Guerriero is a citizen of New York.
`
`59. Defendant Sony Electronics Inc. is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of
`
`business in San Diego California.
`
`60. Diversity exists because plaintiff John Guerriero and defendant are citizens of
`
`different states.
`
`61. Venue is proper in this judicial district because a substantial part of the events or
`
`omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District, viz, the decision of Plaintiff to purchase
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 9 of 14
`
`the Product and the misleading representations and/or their recognition as such.
`
`62. This court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because it conducts and transacts
`
`business, contracts to supply and supplies goods within New York.
`
`Class Allegations
`
`63. The class will consist of all citizens of New York who purchased the a7iii cameras.
`
`64. Plaintiff seeks class-wide injunctive relief based on Rule 23(b) in addition to a
`
`monetary relief class.
`
`65. Common questions of law or fact predominate and include whether defendant’s
`
`practices were misleading with respect to the Product.
`
`66. Plaintiff's claims and basis for relief are typical to other members because all were
`
`subjected to the same representations.
`
`67. Plaintiff is an adequate representative because his interests do not conflict with other
`
`members.
`
`68. No individual inquiry is necessary since the focus is only on defendant’s practices
`
`and the class is definable and ascertainable.
`
`69.
`
`Individual actions would risk inconsistent results, be repetitive and are impractical
`
`to justify, as the claims are modest relative to the scope of the harm.
`
`70. Plaintiff's counsel is competent and experienced in complex class action litigation
`
`and intends to protect class members’ interests adequately and fairly.
`
`71. Plaintiff seeks class-wide injunctive relief because the practices continue.
`
`New York General Business Law (“GBL”) §§ 349 & 350
`(Consumer Protection Statutes)
`
`72. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.
`
`73. Plaintiff and class members desired to purchase a camera which did not suffer from
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 10 of 14
`
`premature shutter failure, which would not be remedied by Defendant even though it was obligated
`
`to do so.
`
`74. Defendant’s acts and omissions are not unique to the parties and have a broader
`
`impact on the public.
`
`75. Defendant intended that plaintiff and class members rely on representations it would
`
`function capably through 200,000 actuations, even though it did not.
`
`76. Plaintiff and class members were misled and/or deceived.
`
`77. Plaintiff relied on the statements, omissions and representations of Defendant, and
`
`Defendant knew or should have known the falsity of same.
`
`78. Plaintiff and class members would not have purchased the Product or paid as much
`
`if the true facts had been known, suffering damages.
`
`Negligent Misrepresentation
`
`79. Defendant had a duty to disclose and/or provide non-deceptive marketing of the
`
`Product and knew or should have known this was false or misleading.
`
`80. This duty is based on Defendant’s position as an entity which has held itself out as
`
`having special knowledge and experience in the production, service and/or sale of the product type.
`
`81. The representations took advantage of consumers’ cognitive shortcuts made at the
`
`point-of-sale and their trust in Defendant, a well-known and respected brand or entity in this sector.
`
`82. Plaintiff and class members reasonably and justifiably relied on these negligent
`
`misrepresentations and omissions, which served to induce and did induce, the purchase of the
`
`Product.
`
`83. Plaintiff and class members would not have purchased the Product or paid as much
`
`if the true facts had been known, suffering damages.
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 11 of 14
`
`Breaches of Express Warranty, Implied Warranty of Merchantability and
`Magnuson Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2301, et seq.
`
`84. The Product was manufactured, represented and sold by Defendant or at its express
`
`directions and instructions, and warranted to Plaintiff and class members that it possessed
`
`attributes, such as durability through the expected actuations, which it did not.
`
`85. Defendant had a duty to disclose and/or provide non-deceptive descriptions and
`
`marketing of the Product.
`
`86. This duty is based, in part, on Defendant’s position as one of the most recognized
`
`companies in the world in this sector.
`
`87. Plaintiff provided or will provide notice to Defendant, its agents, representatives,
`
`retailers and their employees.
`
`88. Defendant received notice and should have been aware of these misrepresentations
`
`due to numerous complaints by consumers to its main office over the past several years regarding
`
`the Product and issues described here.
`
`89. The Product did not conform to its affirmations of fact and promises due to
`
`Defendant’s actions and were not merchantable, especially because the a7iii is used by
`
`professional photographers who cannot afford to suffer a shutter failure when they are shooting an
`
`event.
`
`90. Plaintiff and class members would not have purchased the Product or paid as much
`
`if the true facts had been known, suffering damages.
`
`Fraud
`
`91. Defendant misrepresented the attributes of the Product and knew the statements and
`
`omissions were false and misleading to consumers.
`
`92. Plaintiff and class members would not have purchased the Product or paid as much
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 12 of 14
`
`if the true facts had been known, suffering damages.
`
`Unjust Enrichment
`
`93. Defendant obtained benefits and monies because the Product was not as represented
`
`and expected, to the detriment and impoverishment of Plaintiff and class members, who seek
`
`restitution and disgorgement of inequitably obtained profits.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Jury Demand and Prayer for Relief
`
`Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues.
`
` WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment:
`
`1. Declaring this a proper class action, certifying plaintiff as representative and the
`
`undersigned as counsel for the class;
`
`2. Entering preliminary and permanent injunctive relief by directing defendant to correct the
`
`challenged practices to comply with the law;
`
`3. Injunctive relief to remove, correct and/or refrain from the challenged practices and
`
`representations, and restitution and disgorgement for members of the class pursuant to the
`
`applicable laws;
`
`4. Awarding monetary damages, statutory damages pursuant to any statutory claims and
`
`interest pursuant to the common law and other statutory claims;
`
`5. Awarding costs and expenses, including reasonable fees for plaintiff's attorneys and
`
`experts; and
`
`6. Other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
`
`Dated: March 26, 2021
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Sheehan & Associates, P.C.
`/s/Spencer Sheehan
`Spencer Sheehan
`60 Cuttermill Rd Ste 409
`
`12
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 13 of 14
`
`Great Neck NY 11021-3104
`Tel: (516) 268-7080
`Fax: (516) 234-7800
`spencer@spencersheehan.com
`
`13
`
`
`
`Case 7:21-cv-02618 Document 1 Filed 03/26/21 Page 14 of 14
`
`7:21-cv-02618
`United States District Court
`Southern District of New York
`
`
`John Guerriero, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
`
`
`
`
`
` - against -
`
`
`Sony Electronics Inc.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Defendant
`
`Class Action Complaint
`
`
`Sheehan & Associates, P.C.
`60 Cuttermill Rd Ste 409
`Great Neck NY 11021-3104
`Tel: (516) 268-7080
`Fax: (516) 234-7800
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1, the undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of
`New York State, certifies that, upon information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable
`under the circumstances, the contentions contained in the annexed documents are not frivolous.
`
`Dated: March 26, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Spencer Sheehan
` Spencer Sheehan
`
`
`
`
`
`