The Belkin power bank class action centers on how portable chargers are marketed using milliampere-hours (mAh), a unit that reflects the internal battery’s capacity under specific conditions rather than the usable energy a phone actually receives. Because power banks must boost battery voltage and then a phone must convert it again, some energy is lost to heat and circuitry inefficiencies, so “10,000 mAh” on the label can translate to meaningfully less real-world charge delivered. Buyers in California allege Belkin’s packaging and advertising conveyed an inflated impression of how much power the devices could provide, raising issues that commonly come up in consumer electronics where simple headline specs can obscure performance limits. The lawsuit (Miley v. Belkin International, Inc., Los Angeles Superior Court) was filed as a deceptive advertising and warranty-related challenge, claiming the advertised mAh referred to the internal cell rating rather than the effective output consumers care about. Belkin denies wrongdoing, and the court has not ruled on the merits, but a proposed settlement is open to claims for eligible California purchasers from January 2, 2016 to April 16, 2024: a one-time $5 Belkin website voucher by default (often automatically for those with a Unique ID), or a one-time $2 cash option if requested, with a March 30, 2026 deadline and final approval hearing set for June 12, 2026. Beyond the small individual payout, the case is significant because it reflects broader pressure on electronics brands to clarify performance claims—similar disputes have targeted battery life, charging speed, and “up to” representations—and it sits within California’s consumer-protection landscape (including laws like the Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law) that frequently drives labeling and advertising practices across the industry