Just about every new product in consumer electronics is going to have a problem or two, and there may also be technical issues too. In this potential court case, Apple's problem is one, Jose Trujillo, who is suing Apple and seeking class-action status in a lawsuit over the iPhone. It turns out Apple "marketed it's [sic] iPhone as a 'revolutionary new mobile phone' that incorporates 'high technology'," whatever that means. Besides that, most of the substantive allegations focus on the iPhone battery, including:

Unknown to the Plaintiff, and undisclosed to the public, prior to purchase, the iPhone is a sealed unit with it's [sic] battery soldered on the inside of the device so that it cannot be changed by the owner.

The battery enclosed in the iPhone can only be charged approximately 300 times before it will be in need of replacement, necessitating a new battery annually for owners of the iPhone.

To the Plaintiff's apparent surprise and dismay, you do not have access to a phone while the battery is being replaced unless you pay $29.95 for a loaner, and Apple will erase "all data from the iPhone." Damn them. Also, the cost of all this battery repair is allegedly equal to "20% of the purchase price of the iPhone annually." Finally, none of the details regarding battery life and replacement were to be found anywhere in the materials that came with the phone, and could only be found "under several layers of links" on Apple's support website.

Looking at the court documents, it's—or is it its?—hard to know where to begin, though a cheap shot at Mr. Trujillo's lawyer and the use of possessive pronouns is as good a place as any. Setting aside the fact that the iPhone battery is covered for the first year under warranty, thus negating that first year of the "annual" cost of iPhone ownership, the battery life information is just wrong. The battery page for the iPhone provides Apple's official position on battery life.

A properly maintained iPhone battery is designed to retain up to 80% of its original capacity at 400 full charge and discharge cycles. You may choose to replace your battery when it no longer holds sufficient charge to meet your needs.

The miserly charge cycle described in the lawsuit may possibly have been derived from the review of the iPhone in the New York Times.

Apple says that the battery starts to lose capacity after 300 or 400 charges. Eventually, you’ll have to send the phone to Apple for battery replacement, much as you do now with an iPod, for a fee.

It's hard to imagine any court taking this case seriously, since all the information regarding the iPhone and its battery was published at the time the iPhone went on sale, even if it was not readily apparent to Mr. Trujillo. However, this is America, land of the free and litigious, so you never know.