Turner v. Sony Corporation of America

Background

Sony moved to dismiss and strike portions of the plaintiffs’ first amended complaint. The court had already ruled from the bench on the plaintiffs’ other claims and issued this written order on the fourth claim, for breach of express warranty, and the fifth claim, for breach of the implied warranty of merchantability.

Express-Warranty Claim

The plaintiffs appeared to rely on California Commercial Code section 2313, which recognizes an express warranty when a seller makes an affirmation, promise, or description of goods that becomes part of the basis of the sale. To state such a claim, a plaintiff must identify the seller’s specific statement or promise, show that it formed part of the bargain, and allege that the warranty was breached.

The plaintiffs alleged that Sony expressly warranted that the PlayStation 5 and DualSense controllers were of high quality, would work properly, and would be suitable for gameplay. They also alleged that Sony promised to repair or replace material defects in materials or workmanship during the applicable warranty periods. They claimed Sony breached those warranties by selling controllers with a known defect, failing to correct the defect, and failing to provide an adequate repair.

The court held that these allegations did not identify the exact warranty terms or provide specific details about how and when Sony breached them. At the hearing, the plaintiffs’ lawyer instead pointed to language in the PlayStation 5 warranty stating that the product would be free from material defects in materials and workmanship. Because that language was not quoted or described in the complaint, the court could not consider it when deciding whether the complaint stated a claim. The court therefore dismissed the express-warranty claim with leave to amend.

Implied-Warranty Claim

The plaintiffs alleged that Sony impliedly warranted that the DualSense controllers were in good and merchantable condition, fit for ordinary use, reliable, operable, suitable for gameplay, and substantially free from defects. They alleged that the controllers were not merchantable and were not fit for their ordinary purpose.

Sony argued that its PlayStation 5 warranty disclaimed all implied warranties, including the implied warranty of merchantability. Under California law, a disclaimer may exclude that warranty if it mentions merchantability and is conspicuous. The court found that Sony’s warranty used clear language and capital letters to disclaim implied warranties, including merchantability. The court also noted that the complaint did not allege that the disclaimer was unenforceable.

The plaintiffs’ written opposition did not address Sony’s disclaimer argument. At the hearing, they argued only that the implied warranty arises by law rather than by contract. The court concluded that this did not answer whether Sony’s disclaimer complied with California law. It therefore dismissed the implied-warranty claim with leave to amend.

Disposition

The court dismissed the plaintiffs’ breach of express warranty and breach of implied warranty of merchantability claims with leave to amend. It ordered the plaintiffs to file a second amended complaint consistent with this order and the court’s October 28, 2021 rulings within 14 days of the order.