This is yet another class action complaint and was filed on July 28, 2010. The claims are nearly identical to those involving the liquid submersion indicators in the Gallion v. Apple case reported on here. Thus, I will only note where this plaintiff nuanced his argument a bit differently.

Corsi alleges that the only reason for the external submersion indicators is the amount of skill it takes to open up an iPhone and iPod as opposed to other smartphones which have user-replaceable batteries. And like Gallion, he claims this are unreliable, but also adds the following additional information:

Plaintiff is informed and believes that the Liquid Submersion Indicators are designed and marketed by 3M for use inside, not outside of electronic devices.

In this case, the phone was opened at his insistence and even though the internal indicators were clean and there was no sign of moisture, his warranty claim was denied. He also surrendered his phone and bought the discounted replacement.

As a side note, the other case mentioned by Apple, Pennington, Et Al v. Apple is a Superior Court (state court) case in Santa Clara California which would be why it was not indicated as related to the pending Federal cases. The filings are not available online.

In addition to her position as Assistant Editor at World of Apple, dizzle runs idrankthekoolaid, an Apple fangrl satire blog, and is an Administrator and Hostess at MyAppleSpace and their vidcast MASTv.