Bluetooth Headset Settlement Update

Readers may recall our discussion of the Bluetooth Headset class action settlement, which remarkably granted zero to the class while asking for substantial attorneys’ fees. I asked if anyone was interested in objecting, and the response was overwhelming. Today I’ve filed an objection on behalf of seven clients.

There were more objectors out there than I could feasibly represent. If you wanted to object, but I was unable to represent you, you can still join this objection. Follow the instructions for notifying the court and attorneys of your objection, and simply state, in addition to your name and address and phone number, that you join the objection of William J. Brennan et al., docket number 107. I won’t be your attorney, but you can have the pleasure of “voting” for the objection I wrote.

And anyone in Los Angeles July 6 who wants to watch the hearing, please join in the fun. I’ve got my plane ticket.


  • Link to the objection is broken due to stray characters at the end of the url, correct url is

    Fixed, thx — THF

  • As a German attorney who litigates regularly in everyday insurance law and personal injury cases (and worked in a California firm for 3 months back in 1999) I can only shake my head in disbelief – about the case itself. I deeply admire your pro bono work, you’re doing the right thing! Too bad I’m not a class member, and I can’t be in L.A. in July, either.

    In Germany the highest civil court ruled that 500,000 Euros is the highest possible amount of money that can usually be awarded for personal injuries (in addition to actual damages and costs, of course) – can you believe that? Even complex lawsuits including appeals and big firms hardly cost seven-figure numbers. Your American amounts and figures should all be divided by ten (at least), from a European point of view.
    One tends to say “I know where all those American lawyer jokes come from”, but I wanted to tell you: We do know there are a lot of lawyers like you out there, too – thank you!

  • Ted: It would be really helpful if you could provide a template or example. The instructions indicate (see p. 8) that my “objection must comply with all filing rules of the United States District Court for the Central District of California,” otherwise my “objection may be deemed invalid.” I’m reluctant to take the time to prepare a letter to send in if it will be rejected out of hand because of an error in formatting. Is a letter to the Clerk of the Court cc’d to the Bluetooth Class Action Settlement Administrator” at the addresses provided adequate? Or do I need to submit a statement with all the formatting of a regular legal brief? I’m happy to support you, but you need to make it a bit easier for non-lawyers to comply. Thanks! Hans

  • Dr. Schantz: a simple letter to the two addresses with the Re: line reading “In re Bluetooth Headset Product Liability Litigation, No. 07-ML-1822, MDL 1822” is sufficient; the court has accepted handwritten statements.

  • Well written memorandum!

    Why are you serving paper copies. Isn’t the Central District of Cal. purely e-file and serve?

  • Belt and suspenders. The doc was e-filed.