A class action complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York claims that Hisense, through its marketing on both the Hisense website and retailer websites, made false claims that its TVs included quantum dot technology when they actually did not, or not enough to result in an improvement to the performance. (Questions were brought up about TCL’s use of quantum dots last fall.) The specific Hisense TV models mentioned in the complaint “include, but are not necessarily limited to, the QD5 series, the QD6 series, QD65 series, the QD7 series, the U7 series, and the U7N series.” The complaint documents were filed on February 25, 2025.
The complaint states that the plaintiff, Robert Macioce, purchased a 43-inch QD5 Hisense in November from Best Buy for $159.99. Based on the advertising for the product, the TV “includes QLED Quantum Dot Color” technology which “dramatically increase[s] the color saturation for everything you watch.” The court documents point out that the same terminology is used on the Hisense website. It goes on to say that “the primary reason Plaintiff Macioce purchased the television was because it contained QLED technology, including the advertised performance benefits of that technology, such as providing better picture quality and more vivid colors, as compared to a standard LED television.”
The crux of the lawsuit looks to hinge upon the word “meaningful,” which appears many times throughout the 29-page complaint. Who will decide what “meaningful” means? Perhaps a jury. The plaintiff and his lawyers have called for a trail by jury for the five causes of action included in the complaint.
Not surprisingly, no evidence is referenced in the document, although it does note that, since “quantum dots are produced through a chemical process, the technology leaves known chemical markers.” It goes on to say that consumers would be able to tell if quantum dots were used by detecting any residual chemical markers. The complaint does use the term “upon information and belief” throughout, which means, in legal terms, that the information is based on second-hand knowledge.
We have reached out to Hisense for a statement and will update this article if one is provided.
