Macioce v. Hisense USA Corporation is a pending class action lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The case, docketed as Case No. 1:25-cv-01608-PAE, was initiated on February 25, 2025, by plaintiff Robert Macioce, who alleges that Hisense USA Corporation engaged in false advertising and deceptive business practices regarding its television products.
The dispute arose after Macioce purchased a 43-inch Hisense QD5 model television online from Best Buy on November 23, 2024, for approximately $159.99. Hisense marketed this television, along with other models in the QD5, QD6, QD65, QD7, U7, and U7N series, as featuring Quantum Dot Light-Emitting Diode (QLED) technology. The company’s promotional materials claimed that this technology would “dramatically increase the color space and improve color saturation,” allowing consumers to “see color like you’ve never seen it before.” However, Macioce contends that these televisions either do not actually contain QLED technology or contain it in such negligible amounts that it does not meaningfully enhance the display performance as advertised.
Macioce’s lawsuit asserts several legal claims, including violations of New York consumer protection statutes, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment. Specifically, the complaint alleges that Hisense’s representations about its QLED technology were materially misleading, influencing consumer purchasing decisions and enabling the company to charge premium prices for its televisions. The plaintiff further argues that Hisense knew or should have known that its televisions lacked the advertised technology or contained it in an amount insufficient to justify its marketing claims. As a result, consumers who purchased these televisions, including Macioce, either would not have made the purchase or would have paid significantly less had they been aware of the alleged misrepresentation.
The lawsuit seeks certification as a class action, representing all individuals in New York who purchased one of the specified Hisense television models that were marketed as containing QLED but allegedly did not include it or included it only in negligible amounts. Macioce wants various forms of relief, including a permanent injunction preventing Hisense from continuing its allegedly deceptive practices, actual and punitive damages, disgorgement of profits, restitution, attorney’s fees and costs, and pre- and post-judgment interest. Additionally, Macioce demands a jury trial.
