KANSAS CITY — An Independence woman has sued Apple Inc., alleging that the company’s AirTag tracking device enabled her stalker to follow her movements without her knowledge and that Apple failed to provide adequate protections for Android users.
The complaint, filed Aug. 13 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Kansas City Division, seeks compensatory and punitive damages and a jury trial.
The plaintiff, known as Jane Doe, K.L. 1, alleges that she discovered an Apple AirTag hidden beneath the driver’s seat of her vehicle on or about Oct. 8, 2025.
At the time, she was using an Android phone and did not receive an unwanted-tracking notification from Apple, according to the complaint.
She also did not have Apple’s Tracker Detect application or a similar application installed.
The AirTag was linked to an Apple device associated with her stalker, the lawsuit alleges.
The plaintiff says she has an email from the stalker stating that the AirTag was how he found her and asking for its return, along with photographs and other evidence related to the AirTag and alleged stalking.
She reported the AirTag and the related stalking to the Kansas City Police Department in October 2025, the filing says.
According to the complaint, the alleged stalking campaign was accompanied by physical violence, theft, property destruction, threats and economic losses.
The plaintiff alleges she suffered a hand infection and a broken eye socket, lost her new home, incurred medical and relocation expenses, lost wages and continues to experience fear, distress, anxiety and concern for her safety.
The lawsuit alleges that AirTags, introduced by Apple in April 2021, use Bluetooth signals and Apple’s Find My network to report their locations to registered owners.
The complaint says the product’s reliance on nearby Apple devices permits near-continuous, real-time location tracking in populated areas.
The plaintiff contends that Apple was warned before the AirTag’s release that the device could be used to stalk, coerce and endanger victims, particularly people experiencing intimate-partner violence.
The complaint alleges that Apple nonetheless publicly represented the AirTag as “stalker-proof” and minimized concerns about misuse.
The filing also alleges that Apple’s safeguards were inadequate.
It says iPhone alerts for unknown AirTags can be delayed and that an alert, once dismissed, may not reappear.
For more than two years after AirTags were released, the complaint alleges, Android users had no automated alerts and instead had to independently download and manually use the Tracker Detect application.
The lawsuit alleges that the app did not run in the background, required users to initiate scans and did not adequately help users distinguish or locate a specific AirTag.
Apple and Google later developed cross-platform alerts, which were rolled out to Android users after AirTags had been on the market for about two and a half years, according to the complaint.
The plaintiff also alleges that the AirTag’s sound alert is too quiet, insufficiently distinctive and can be disabled by tampering with the device’s speaker.
She contends that people being tracked must physically locate an AirTag and remove its battery to disable it, a process that can be costly and may compromise evidence.
The complaint asserts claims of negligence, strict liability for design defect, strict liability for failure to warn and invasion of privacy through intrusion upon seclusion.
It alleges that Apple could have adopted safer alternatives, including background alerts for Android users, preserved alert histories, a way to remotely disable a nearby AirTag and design changes that would stop tracking if the speaker were disabled.
The plaintiff asks the court to award damages for medical expenses, physical and emotional harm, property losses, lost wages, relocation expenses and other losses, as well as punitive damages, interest and court costs.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Kansas City Division case number: 4:26-cv-00681
