Hewlett-Packard, a U.S.-based company, is famous for its reliable laptop computers and printers. Wilson purchased an HP Pavilion Notebook computer in the summer of 2004 for approximately $1,500. In the fall of 2006, over two years after its purchase and shortly after the limited warranty expired, Wilson's laptop began to display low-power warnings and would run on battery power even when plugged into an AC adapter. Wilson alleges that the problem became worse until he "was unable to utilize the laptop at all." When Wilson contacted HP about his laptop in or about December 2006, HP informed him that his warranty had expired on August 15, 2006, and that he could return the laptop to HP and have his motherboard replaced for over $400, plus shipping and taxes. He opted to have his battery and AC adapter changed for $150, to no effect. Wilson then proceeded to sue, in early 2009, claiming that HP had not disclosed the defect to its consumers. The case was later dismissed after it was presented that the laptop stopped working outside of its warranty span. One day, Wilson turned his laptop on, and it began to smoke and emit fire. When Wilson sued again, he received the same results. Furthermore, the court stated that "complaint's allegations were insufficient to plausibly allege a defect in the HP laptop computers that creates an unreasonable safety risk." Do you believe that HP violated consumer safety law? Why or why not? [Wilson v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 10-16249, (9th Cir. 2012).]