Apple Watch Lawsuit: Are Your Watch Bands Toxic?

Case Overview: A new class action lawsuit is raising concerns about the safety of Apple Watch bands, alleging they contain PFAS, also known as "forever chemicals," linked to health risks.

Consumers Affected: Consumers who purchased Apple Watch bands containing PFAS.

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

Apple Watch bands contain harmful levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), commonly known as "forever chemicals,” putting consumers at risk all while the company encourages constant use of the watches, a new lawsuit claims.

The lawsuit argues Apple misled consumers by marketing the bands as health-conscious and environmentally friendly while failing to disclose the presence of toxic substances. PFAS, used in Apple’s fluoroelastomer Sport Band, Ocean Band, and Nike Sport Band, have been linked to serious health risks, including cancer and reproductive harm. The lawsuit argues that consumers—many of whom purchased Apple Watches to monitor their health—reasonably expected the bands to be safe for prolonged wear.

Apple Watch Bands Contain Toxic "Forever Chemicals," Lawsuit Claims

The lawsuit was filed by California residents Dominique Cavalier and Kiley Krzyzek, who say they purchased Apple Watches with fluoroelastomer bands, believing them to be safe. Cavalier, who used the watch to track sleep, developed skin irritation where the band made contact with her wrist. Krzyzek, a flight attendant, wore the watch for up to 12 hours a day, unaware of any potential chemical exposure.

Both plaintiffs say Apple’s extensive marketing led them to believe the bands were designed to promote wellness and sustainability. They argue that had they known about the PFAS content, they would have either avoided the purchase or paid less for the product.

Consumers Say Apple Misled Them on Health and Safety

PFAS are synthetic chemicals that resist heat, water, and oil, making them durable but also highly persistent in the environment and human body. The substances do not break down easily and can accumulate over time, leading to serious health risks.

Studies have linked PFAS exposure to increased risks of prostate and kidney cancer, hormonal disruptions, immune system suppression, and developmental issues in children. Absorption through the skin, particularly in areas prone to sweat—such as the underside of the wrist—can increase exposure levels. The lawsuit alleges that Apple could have used safer materials, as many other smartwatch bands on the market do not contain excessive PFAS.

Legal Troubles Mount for Apple

Apple is no stranger to lawsuits. The company is currently facing multiple legal battles, including a long-running class action lawsuit over alleged anti-competitive practices in the App Store, which is set for trial in 2026. Additionally, Apple and Google are both being sued for allegedly profiting from online casino apps disguised as entertainment platforms.

Apple is also dealing with a lawsuit regarding its first-generation AirPods Pro, with consumers claiming the devices suffer from an undisclosed audio defect.

Meanwhile, Samsung is facing a nearly identical legal challenge over its Galaxy Watch bands. A lawsuit filed in California alleges that Samsung misled consumers about the safety of its watch straps, which also contain PFAS.

In the Apple watch band PFAs class action lawsuit, Cavalier and Krzyzek want to represent consumers from across the country in their claims of violations of California business laws, fraud, fraudulent concealment or omission, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and more. They are seeking injunctive relief, damages, fees, costs, and interest.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Cavalier, et al. v. Apple Inc.
• Case Number: 5:25-cv-00713-VKD 
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• Ryan Clarkson, Yana Hart, and Mark Richards (Clarkson Law Firm P.C.)
• Benjamin F. Johns and Samantha E. Holbrook (Shub Johns & Holbrook LLP)

Do you own an Apple Watch? What are your thoughts on this lawsuit? Share your opinion in the comments below.