Apple has agreed to a $20 million class action settlement over allegations that certain Apple Watch models—First Generation through Series 3—were prone to battery swelling that could push the display upward, crack the screen, or cause other damage. Plaintiffs say this defect could appear during normal use and that owners were often left dealing with repairs, replacements, or diminished device value. The settlement covers U.S. consumers who owned or owned these watches and reported battery-swell-related issues to Apple during the class period from April 24, 2015, to February 6, 2024, with an expected payment of $20 per qualifying device and the possibility of up to $50 depending on how many valid claims are paid from the fund. The lawsuit was filed on theories like fraud by omission, breach of implied warranty, and violations of state consumer-protection laws, essentially arguing that Apple failed to adequately disclose a known risk and that the watches did not meet ordinary durability expectations. Beyond the dollars, the case is significant because it pressures manufacturers of tightly packed wearables to be more transparent about battery aging and failure modes—especially when battery expansion can physically damage nearby components. The claims process also reflects how modern class settlements are administered: no proof of purchase required for many claimants, and payments routed through options like ACH, virtual prepaid cards, or checks, with a deadline to select or update payment details by April 10, 2025 via WatchSettlement.com. More broadly, this fits a familiar pattern in consumer electronics litigation: as devices get thinner and more integrated, battery-related issues can cascade into expensive, non-user-serviceable failures, prompting disputes over what companies should disclose and what warranties should cover. Similar class actions have targeted alleged design defects in phones, laptops, and other wearables where normal battery degradation or swelling can impair safety or functionality, and these cases often hinge on state “unfair and deceptive acts” statutes and implied-warranty rules that require products to be fit for ordinary use. In the background are industry expectations around lithium-ion battery management, quality control, and product safety oversight, where manufacturers must balance performance and compact design against known risks of cell expansion over time and the consumer-protection consequences when that risk is alleged to have been downplayed or not disclosed