Apple's "Eco-Friendly" Watch Claims Face Legal Challenge

Case Overview: Apple confronts a lawsuit over alleged misleading "carbon neutral" claims on its watches, with plaintiffs citing questionable carbon offset projects.

Consumers Affected: U.S. consumers who purchased an Apple Watch Series 9, Apple Watch SE (2nd generation), or Apple Watch Ultra 2.

Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Apple misled consumers by falsely marketing certain Apple Watches as "carbon neutral," leading them into buying products under false pretences, a new lawsuit alleges.

The lawsuit says that Apple’s carbon offset projects—central to its environmental claims—fail to deliver real emissions reductions, effectively deceiving eco-conscious buyers into paying premium prices for a sustainability promise the company allegedly hasn’t kept.

Apple Accused of Deceptive Environmental Marketing

The lawsuit, filed by a group of Apple consumers from across the U.S., alleges that they purchased Apple Watches believing the devices were environmentally friendly, only to later discover that Apple’s carbon neutrality claims were based on flawed offset projects. The plaintiffs—Othame Dib, Jesus Guerrero, Luca Dela Cruz, Jeanette Porillo, Peter Ghanem, Rita Crane, and Nathaniel Sansom—state they relied on Apple’s marketing when making their purchases.

Apple prominently advertised its Apple Watch Series 9, Apple Watch SE (2nd generation), and Apple Watch Ultra 2 as its first-ever carbon-neutral products. The plaintiffs argue that Apple used this green branding to justify premium pricing and differentiate itself from competitors, despite allegedly failing to deliver on its sustainability promises.

Plaintiffs Challenge Legitimacy of Carbon Offset Efforts

Apple’s September 2023 product launch placed a heavy emphasis on its environmental initiatives, with company executives touting the watches as part of its goal to be carbon neutral by 2030. Apple claimed it had reduced 75% of the devices’ emissions through various sustainability measures and offset the remaining 25% through high-quality carbon credits from nature-based projects, the lawsuit explains.

These claims were reinforced by a massive marketing campaign, including a promotional video viewed more than 33 million times, where Apple’s vice president of Environment, Policy, and Social Initiatives, Lisa Jackson, stated that emissions were balanced out by credits from forest and wetland projects. The company even placed a special carbon-neutral logo on product packaging to drive home the message.

According to the lawsuit, Apple’s carbon offset strategy heavily relies on two projects: the Chyulu Hills Project in Kenya and the Guinan Afforestation Project in China. Plaintiffs argue these projects do not generate real, additional carbon reductions.

The Chyulu Hills Project claims to prevent deforestation in a protected area where logging has been banned since 1983, meaning it does not create new environmental benefits. Meanwhile, the Guinan Project involves planting trees on land that was already heavily forested before the initiative began. Plaintiffs say these projects do not offset Apple’s emissions as the company claims, making its carbon-neutral branding misleading.

Apple Among Firms Facing Sustainability Claim Disputes

Apple isn’t the only company facing legal scrutiny over alleged deceptive sustainability claims. Other corporations have recently been hit with similar lawsuits accusing them of greenwashing.

Amazon is under fire for using sustainability branding on its Amazon Basics Paper Products while allegedly sourcing materials from suppliers involved in destructive logging. Florida Crystals, a major sugar producer, is being sued over its environmental impact from sugarcane field burning, despite presenting itself as an eco-friendly brand.

Lululemon also faces allegations of misleading consumers with its "Be Planet" campaign, while continuing business practices that reportedly generate high emissions.

In their lawsuit against Apple, the plaintiffs want to represent anyone in the country who bought an Apple Watch Series 9, Apple Watch SE (2nd generation), or Apple Watch Ultra 2. They are suing for violations of state consumer protection laws, breach of express and implied warranties, unjust enrichment, and fraud, and are seeking damages, injunctive relief, fees, costs, and interest.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Dib et al. v. Apple Inc.
• Case Number: 5:25-cv-02043  
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California 

Plaintiffs' Attorney:

• Amber L. Schubert (Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP)
• Fletch Trammell (Trammell PC)
• Don Bivens and Teresita T. Mercado (Don Bivens, PLLC)

Do you scrutinize 'green' labels? Share your perspective on Apple's assertions below.