Source: https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/California_Northern_District_Court/5--20-cv-03584/Malone_v._Western_Digital_Corporation/1/
Timestamp: 2020-08-08 09:09:03
Document Index: 752946193

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1750', '§ 17500', '§ 17200', '§ 1750', '§ 17500', '§ 17200', '§ 1332', '§ 1391', '§ 1391']

Malone v. Western Digital Corporation, 5:20-cv-03584, No. 1 (N.D.Cal. May. 29, 2020)
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 1 of 33
`Daniel M. Hattis (SBN 232141)
`Paul Karl Lukacs (SBN 197007)
`HATTIS & LUKACS
`400 108th Ave NE, Ste 500
`Bellevue, WA 98004
`Telephone: (425) 233-8650
`Facsimile: (425) 412-7171
`Email: dan@hattislaw.com
`Email: pkl@hattislaw.com
`Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class
`NICHOLAS MALONE,
`for Himself, as a Private Attorney
`General, and/or On Behalf Of All
`WESTERN DIGITAL CORPORATION,
` Case No. 5:20-cv-03584
`COMPLAINT FOR:
`(1) VIOLATION OF CAL. CIVIL CODE
`§ 1750
`(2) VIOLATION OF CAL. BUSINESS &
`PROFESSIONS CODE § 17500
`(3) VIOLATION OF CAL. BUSINESS &
`PROFESSIONS CODE § 17200
`Plaintiff Nicholas Malone, individually, as a private attorney general, and/or on behalf
`of all others similarly situated, alleges as follows, on personal knowledge and investigation of
`his counsel, against Defendant Western Digital Corporation (“WDC” or “Defendant”):
`400 108th Ave. NE, Ste 500
`T: 425.233.8650 | F: 425.412.7171
`www.hattislaw.com
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 2 of 33
`INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
`This case is brought against Western Digital Corporation (“WDC” or “Western
`Digital”) on behalf of all United States residents who purchased certain hard drives which were
`branded “WD Red NAS” and were explicitly advertised and represented to be designed for and
`suitable for use in NAS (network attached storage) devices, but which in fact are not suitable
`for that intended use and which put customer data at greater risk of data loss or destruction due
`to the use of inferior hard drive technology which is not appropriate or compatible with usage
`in NAS devices. The inferior (and cheaper) hard drive technology utilized by WDC in the hard
`drives is called “SMR” (Shingled Magnetic Recording). WDC surreptitiously sneaked—
`without any disclosure whatsoever—this SMR technology into its WD Red NAS hard drives
`within the past year or so in an effort to shave costs while keeping the selling price the same.
`This inferior SMR technology replaced the more-expensive-to-produce but
`industry-standard “CMR” (Conventional Magnetic Recording) technology which WDC had
`previously used—for nearly a decade—in these very same “WD Red NAS” branded hard
`drives. Industry experts agree and have gone on the record (including WDC’s competitor
`Seagate Technology) that this SMR technology is completely inappropriate, and even
`dangerous, for NAS or RAID usage, and should never be used in such an application. (NAS,
`RAID, and other technical terms in this introduction are fully explained in the body, infra.)
`Yet, even after WDC was caught perpetrating this scheme in April 2020 (after
`initially denying the hard drives utilized SMR technology, but then finally admitting it), WDC
`has continued to falsely advertise that these SMR-technology WD Red NAS hard drives are
`“purpose-built” for NAS and RAID to “help preserve your data.”
`As a result of WDC’s fraud and deception, thousands of customers nationwide
`who purchased the WD Red NAS hard drives for their advertised and intended use have been
`duped, and have suffered harm and damages. These WD Red NAS hard drives with the inferior
`SMR technology are potential ticking time bombs that risk the destruction of customer data and
`files at any moment, because the data recovery and redundancy features of the NAS device may
`fail during the RAID rebuilding process (also called “resilvering”) as the SMR hard drives
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 3 of 33
`cannot handle the continuous sustained writes and heavy random writes which necessarily then
`occur. (The term “writes” as used in this Complaint includes writes and re-writes of data.)
`Customers are also often unable to expand their NAS storage capacity by adding more hard
`drives, which requires a similar resilvering process as the data is redistributed and rewritten
`across all the hard drives. In fact, the SMR hard drives are simply unable to handle continuous
`sustained random writes (which often occurs in normal NAS usage) without freezing up and
`reporting “timeouts” to the NAS device, causing poor performance. The WD Red NAS drives
`may also fail to adequately function while performing standard and expected RAID
`“scrubbing,” which is a recommended periodic data integrity check where all the data on the
`hard drive is checked for errors and consistency and automatically corrected. Ultimately, the
`WD Red NAS devices are wholly inappropriate for their intended and advertised use (which
`WDC even put in the product’s name: WD Red “NAS”). The hard drives are completely
`worthless for their intended purpose—and are in fact dangerous to customer data.
`Plaintiff Nicholas Malone brings this action individually on his own behalf as a
`deceived Western Digital customer and as a private attorney general seeking an order for public
`injunctive relief to protect the general public, directing that WDC stop advertising, and to
`instruct its resellers to stop advertising, any hard drives with SMR technology as being
`appropriate for NAS devices or RAID (including by removing “NAS” from such products’
`names).
`Plaintiff also brings this action as a representative plaintiff on behalf of a
`nationwide class of consumers who purchased WD Red NAS hard drives utilizing SMR
`technology, seeking, among other things, that Defendant be ordered to disgorge all revenues
`Defendant has unjustly received from the members of the class. Plaintiff also seeks an order
`requiring Defendant to: (1) provide notice to every class member that the WD Red NAS hard
`drive they purchased is not suited for its intended purpose; and (2) either provide a full refund
`to Plaintiff and class members for their WD Red NAS hard drives, or provide Plaintiff and
`class members with replacement CMR-technology hard drives that are truly suited for use with
`NAS devices and RAID, at no additional cost.
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 4 of 33
`Plaintiff brings these claims under California statutory authority and principles
`of equity including the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, California Civil Code § 1750 et seq.;
`the False Advertising Law, California Business & Professions Code § 17500 et seq.; and the
`Unfair Competition Law, California Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq.
`Plaintiff Nicholas Malone is a citizen of the United States of America and
`Wisconsin and is an individual and a natural adult person who resides in Madison, Wisconsin.
`Like all members of the proposed class, Plaintiff Malone purchased a WD Red
`NAS Drive that utilized SMR technology. Specifically, Plaintiff Malone purchased on
`Amazon.com, four (4) “WD Red 6TB NAS Hard Drives – 5400 RPM Class, SATA 6 GB/s,
`256 MB Cache, 3.5” – Model Number: WD60EFAX” for $150.12 each on March 6, 2020.
`Defendant Western Digital Corporation is a Delaware corporation with its
`principal place of business and/or nerve center located at 5601 Great Oaks Parkway, San Jose,
`California 95119.
`Subject Matter Jurisdiction. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over
`this civil action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2)—i.e., Class Action Fairness Act jurisdiction
`—because the amount in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5 million (exclusive of
`interest and costs) and is a class action in which any member of a class of plaintiffs is a citizen
`of a state different from any defendant.
`Personal Jurisdiction. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant
`because: (1) Defendant WDC is headquartered in San Jose, California (which is within the
`Northern District of California) and is authorized to do business and regularly conducts
`business in the State of California such that the maintenance of this lawsuit does not offend
`traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice; and/or (2) Defendant has committed
`tortious acts within the State of California (as alleged, without limitation, throughout this
`Complaint).
`Venue. Venue is proper in the Northern District of California because, pursuant
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 5 of 33
`to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1), this judicial district is a judicial district in which Defendant WDC
`resides, and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(2), for venue purposes WDC shall be deemed to
`reside in this judicial district because WDC is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with
`respect to this civil action.
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`14. Western Digital (“WDC”) is one of the largest manufacturers of hard drives in
`the world. Western Digital manufactures two different types of hard drives: traditional large-
`capacity spinning disk mechanical hard drives, and more modern but smaller-capacity solid-
`state flash storage drives (often also called hard drives) which have no moving parts. This
`Complaint concerns the traditional large capacity spinning disk mechanical hard drives, and
`any reference to “hard drives” herein means traditional spinning disk mechanical hard drives.
`Hard drives are utilized to store digital data and files for a home or business
`computer system. Several hundred million hard drives (spinning disk mechanical hard drives)
`are sold each year to consumers and businesses worldwide. Hard drives utilize spinning
`magnetic disk technology to hold information inscribed in very tiny tracks, somewhat similar to
`how a vinyl record holds information read by record players. These hard drives have moving
`parts, including a mechanical head which reads and writes data to one or more disk platters,
`which are contained inside a single sealed unit.
`In 2012, WDC released its WD Red series NAS hard drives, which were
`specifically designed for NAS (network-attached storage) systems and for RAID (Redundant
`Array of Independent Disks) environments. A NAS device is a stand-alone computing device
`which typically contains multiple individual hard drives that are grouped together to form one
`large datastore, which is used to store files and share them with other computers or laptops over
`a network. RAID is a technology, typically utilized in NAS devices, of combining multiple
`hard drives into a single logical datastore or virtual drive for data redundancy, data security,
`and performance purposes. NAS devices which contain four or more hard disks typically (and
`often automatically) format the drives in a “disk striping” format such as RAID 5 or RAID 6 or
`ZFS software or hardware RAID, which builds in redundancy such that one or multiple drives
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 6 of 33
`can fail and data will not be lost. (ZFS is a proprietary file system and logical disk volume
`manager owned by Oracle with robust redundancy and error-correction features; the term
`“ZFS” is also often used to mean OpenZFS, which is a popular open-source version of ZFS.)
`NAS devices have become increasingly popular for both home and small business use, as the
`use of digital data has exploded over the years including digital files, photographs, and videos
`which have required ever-increasing storage capacity which NAS devices (with their grouping
`of large hard drives) are able to provide along with data redundancy.
`Hard drives which are designed and built for NAS and RAID must have certain
`characteristics. In particular, such hard drives must be able to handle continuous and sustained
`writes and heavy random writes, which necessarily occur during the RAID rebuilding process
`(also called “resilvering”) when a failed hard drive in a striped RAID array (standard in a NAS)
`is replaced with a new drive and the data is redistributed across the replacement drive and the
`other drives. Continuous and sustained random writes also occur when the storage capacity of a
`RAID array is expanded by adding hard drives, which requires a similar resilvering process
`where the data is redistributed and spread across all the drives.
`Continuous and sustained writes and heavy random writes also occur during
`RAID “scrubbing,” which is a standard and recommended periodic data integrity check where
`all the data on the hard drive is checked for errors and consistency and automatically corrected.
`NAS manufacturers generally recommend (and often set their devices to automatically
`perform) RAID scrubbing at least once a month to maintain system health and to prevent data
`Hard drives designed and built for NAS and RAID also are expected to have
`reliable and fast random-write performance in general, and to be able to handle continuous
`random writes (where data may also be being written from multiple computers on the network
`simultaneously).
`For nearly a decade, WDC has enjoyed a strong reputation as best-in-class for its
`WD Red NAS hard drives. WDC today continues to advertise its WD Red NAS hard drives as
`the “Built for NAS compatibility” and “Designed for RAID environments.” WDC
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 7 of 33
`advertises WD Red NAS hard drives as “specifically designed for use in NAS systems with
`up to 8 bays” and appropriate for “small and home office NAS systems in a 24x7
`environment.” See the WDC product spec sheet for WD Red NAS hard drives available on the
`web at https://products.wdc.com/library/SpecSheet/ENG/2879-800002.pdf, a printout of which
`is attached hereto as Exhibit A. And until 2018, WDC’s advertising rang true, and its WD Red
`NAS hard drives, which utilized industry-standard CMR (conventional magnetic recording)
`technology, did indeed rightfully earn a reputation for reliability and being “purpose-built” and
`well suited for NAS and RAID environments.
`However, in 2018, WDC secretly swapped out the industry-standard CMR
`technology from many of its WD Red NAS hard drives, and replaced it with inferior (and
`cheaper) hard drive technology called SMR (shingled magnetic recording). WDC switched the
`recording technology in these drives to SMR for one reason: to reduce its costs and increase its
`profits. SMR technology enables WDC to fit 25% more data onto the same-size disk platters,
`thus significantly reducing its costs to produce the drives. Meanwhile, WDC kept this switch to
`SMR technology a secret, so that it could continue to charge the same price as it previously
`charged for CMR drives, thereby increasing its profits. WDC intentionally did not disclose its
`use of SMR technology in the hard drives anywhere whatsoever. WDC did not mention the
`SMR technology in its advertising, in its hard drive documentation, in the hard drive product
`spec sheets, or in the labeling on the hard drive itself.
`Unfortunately, this SMR technology is wholly inappropriate for use in NAS and
`RAID systems—which is the very use that WDC advertises and promises that these WD Red
`NAS hard drives are suitable and “purpose-built” for.
`SMR technology was created, and had previously been utilized, to increase
`storage density in large capacity hard drives, but at the expense of write performance.
`Historically, the SMR hard drives had been limited to cost-effective archiving on the industry’s
`very largest hard drives, and/or used for cold storage (e.g., long-term storage where after the
`drive is filled it is unplugged and put on a shelf for safekeeping)—applications where fast or
`reliable continuous random-write speed was not required.
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 8 of 33
`SMR technology allows the tracks on a hard disk platter to be layered on top of
`each other, like roof shingles on a house, to increase platter and storage density. Hard drives
`that use SMR technology are significantly slower in writing data than CMR hard drives
`because when an SMR drive writes to an area, the entire region (e.g., below and above the
`shingle) will need to be read, copied, and re-written, in contrast to a standard CMR drive where
`the data can be written quickly and discretely.
`Some SMR hard drives, like the WD Red NAS hard drives at issue in this case,
`manage this data writing and rewriting process on the drive itself via DM-SMR technology,
`i.e., drive-managed SMR. By utilizing DM-SMR technology, WDC was able to hide this
`process from computing devices and the user, via caching tricks which (when the drive was
`being written to only intermittently and not on a sustained continuous basis) can camouflage
`the slowness of the drive. WDC utilized increased DRAM memory cache on the hard drive and
`also a small CMR cache zone to function as a temporary storage space. Data writes by such
`DM-SMR drives are first temporarily stored on the staging disk area (the small CMR cache
`zone). Then, when the disk is idle (i.e., when there is no writing being made to it), the hard
`drive will rearrange the data in the background, moving the data that was temporarily saved in
`the CMR cache over to the main SMR part of the drive; this is also referred to as the “garbage
`collection” process.
`However, after continuous sustained random writes, the CMR cache layer
`becomes full, and the drive slows down dramatically—it essentially “chokes” and stops the
`flow of data while it flushes out the CMR cache and tries to catch up on the much slower
`writing to the main SMR hard disk. This is especially problematic and dangerous when the hard
`drive has been set up in a NAS as part of a RAID array. In that case, the choking hard drive
`reports “timeouts” or loss of connectivity to the NAS, which logically assumes the hard disk
`has failed and then kicks the drive out of the RAID array, which can cause catastrophic data
`27. When WDC downgraded the technology in its WD Red NAS hard drives to
`SMR technology, it did so secretly, without telling a soul. Based on information and belief,
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 9 of 33
`WDC did not inform the NAS manufacturers, who had tested and certified the previous CMR
`versions of the identically-labeled hard drives, that it had replaced the guts of these white-listed
`drives with cheaper and poor-performing SMR technology. Based on information and belief,
`WDC likewise did not inform its resellers, such as Amazon.com, that it had replaced the guts of
`many of its WD Red NAS hard drives with inferior and cheaper SMR technology.
`28. When WDC downgraded its hard drives to SMR technology, WDC did not
`change any of the advertising or representations it had made regarding the hard drives being
`“purpose-built” and suitable for NAS and RAID. WDC did not make any disclosure
`whatsoever of its use of SMR technology in the hard drives. WDC advertising and
`specifications, which were also utilized by its resellers in their ads and product web pages for
`the hard drives, continued to make the exact same representations and statements that the WD
`Red NAS hard drives were specifically intended and appropriate for NAS and RAID.
`Starting around March 2019, various purchasers of WD Red NAS hard
`drives began reporting poor write performance and consistent failures during RAID
`resilvering.
`For example, one user stated: “[W]hen I was moving data from one drive to
`another, several terabytes worth, it literally took most of a week. The drive would fill 30GB,
`then stop and basically lock up the OS.”1
`Another user stated: “[T]he latest iteration of WD REDS [are] unable to be used
`for rebuilding RAID[56] or RAIDZ sets: They rebuild for a while (1-2 hours), then throw errors
`and get kicked out of the set.”2
`Another user posted on a Synology (a leading NAS manufacturer) user forum
`that he was unable to add a new WD Red NAS 6TB drive to a RAID setup containing three
`older WD Red NAS 6TB drives. When the user added the new WD Red NAS drive, the
`1 See https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/04/caveat-emptor-smr-disks-are-being-submarined-
`into-unexpected-channels/.
`2 See https://blocksandfiles.com/2020/04/14/wd-red-nas-drives-shingled-magnetic-recording/.
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 10 of 33
`resilvering process took over three days and then failed.3
`Purchasers also reported being unable to use the hard drives in their NAS
`systems, and that the hard drives kept getting kicked out of their RAID arrays. One user stated:
`“Attempting to replace drives in my existing array resulted in new WD-RED WD40EFAX
`drives (multiple units) throwing HARD errors (IDNF - Sector ID not found) and being kicked
`out of the array. That’s apart from them pausing for 30-180 seconds at a time occasionally
`whilst they rebuild their internals, or the painfully slow random-write speeds when you throw
`more than about 2GB at a time at them.”4
`Another user posted: “I got recently bit by WD40EFAX [a WD Red NAS SMR
`drive] … When I tried to replace one of the failed WD Red disk in my vdev I started getting
`bunch of errors… I replaced that with WD purple [a CMR drive] and haven’t had any problems
`so far.”5
`Some hard drive technology enthusiasts noticed that the reported problems
`appeared to affect WD Red NAS drives below 8TB (8 terabytes) of size, with a SKU
`containing the letters “EFAX.”
`Several of these technology enthusiasts noted that, remarkably, the official
`WDC spec sheet for the EFAX hard drives (see Exhibit A) indicated the EFAX drives should
`have better performance than the prior version of the drives (which contained the letters
`“EFRX”). The EFAX drives were listed with a faster “interface transfer rate” (180 MB/s versus
`as low as 150 MB/s), and with four times as much DRAM cache (256MB versus 64MB). The
`data sheet gave zero indication whatsoever that the EFAX drives contained SMR technology
`(as compared to the prior EFRX versions of the “same” drives which contained the standard
`CMR technology).
`Nonetheless, some of these technology enthusiasts experiencing problems
`3 See https://community.synology.com/enu/forum/1/post/127228.
`4 See
`https://np.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/fyhzl9/disguised_smr_drives_the_official_west
`ern_digital/.
`5 Ibid.
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 11 of 33
`publicly surmised that the drives may in fact be SMR drives, because their poor write
`performance, RAID and NAS incompatibility, and freezing up was consistent with the
`limitations of SMR technology.
`38. When asked whether the hard drives utilized SMR technology, WDC’s public
`response was to deny it. For example, on March 30, 2020, Yemi Elegunde, an enterprise and
`channel sales manager for Western Digital’s UK operations, expressly denied that the WD Red
`drives used SMR technology, stating: “The only SMR drive that Western Digital will have in
`production is our 20TB hard enterprise hard drives and even these will not be rolled out into the
`channel. All of our current range of hard drives are based on CMR Conventional Magnetic
`Recording.”
`Based on information and belief, WDC customer support staff were instructed to
`refuse to acknowledge that the WD Red NAS hard drives now utilized SMR technology. One
`purchaser reported WDC’s response when he contacted WDC customer support to ask if the
`drive utilized SMR versus CMR technology: “Western Digital support has gotten back to me.
`They have advised me that they are not providing that information so they are unable to tell me
`if the drive is SMR or PMR [PMR is another term used for CMR]. LOL. He said that my
`question would have to be escalated to a higher team to see if they can obtain that info for me.”
`Then, “the higher team contacted me back and informed me that the information I requested
`about whether or not the WD60EFAX was a SMR or PMR would not be provided to me. They
`said that information is not disclosed to consumers. LOL. WOW.”6 (Emphasis added.)
`Based on information and belief, when consumers contacted WDC to complain
`of the poor performance of their (SMR-technology) WD Red NAS hard drives in NAS and
`RAID environments, WDC as a matter of policy continued to insist that the hard drives were
`suitable for those environments, failed to disclose that the drives utilized (inappropriate) SMR
`technology, and blamed the user or the user’s other equipment for the poor performance.
`In April 2020, a leading storage technology website, Blocks & Files, began
`6 See https://community.synology.com/enu/forum/1/post/127228
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 12 of 33
`investigating this possible undisclosed use of SMR technology in WD Red NAS hard drives,
`after an information technology expert brought his suspicions to their attention. As stated in the
`Blocks and Files article published April 14, 2020: “Alan Brown, a network manager at UCL
`Mullard Space Science laboratory, the UK’s largest university-based space research group, told
`us about his problems adding a new WD Red NAS drive to a RAID array at his home.
`Although it was sold as a RAID drive, the device ‘keep[s] getting kicked out of RAID arrays
`due to errors during resilvering,’ he said.”7 Mr. Brown suspected the drive was an SMR drive,
`and his testing seemed to confirm his hypothesis. Mr. Brown told the website that the WD Red
`NAS drive’s poor performance had “been a hot-button issue in the datahoarder Reddit for over
`a year. People are getting pretty peeved by it because SMR drives have ROTTEN performance
`for random write usage.” Ibid.
`Until then, WDC had never publicly admitted that the WD Red NAS drives
`utilized SMR technology. But, when Blocks & Files contacted WDC and asked them point-
`blank whether WD Red NAS drives used SMR technology, WDC realized the jig was up.
`WDC had been caught. WDC was finally forced to acknowledge the truth.
`43. WDC stated on the record to Blocks and Files (in the article published April 14,
`2020):
`Currently, Western Digital’s WD Red 2TB-6TB drives are device-managed SMR
`(DMSMR)… You are correct that we do not specify recording technology in our
`WD Red HDD documentation. We strive to make the experience for our NAS
`customers seamless, and recording technology typically does not impact small
`business/home NAS-based use cases. In device-managed SMR HDDs, the drive
`does its internal data management during idle times. In a typical small
`business/home NAS environment, workloads tend to be bursty in nature, leaving
`sufficient idle time for garbage collection and other maintenance operations.8
`Once WDC finally admitted what it had done, WDC was universally condemned
`by the technology press. Storage experts were in utter disbelief that WDC would do something
`so utterly reckless and inappropriate as sneak SMR technology into hard drives that WDC
`7 See https://blocksandfiles.com/2020/04/14/wd-red-nas-drives-shingled-magnetic-recording/.
`8 Ibid.
`Case 5:20-cv-03584-NC Document 1 Filed 05/29/20 Page 13 of 33
`advertised and represented to be designed for NAS and RAID.9 As Alan Brown stated in a
`separate interview article with Block and Files, these SMR-technology WD Red NAS hard
`drives were “unfit for the purpose for which they are marketed.”10
`As the scandal unfolded, Seagate Technology (WDC’s largest competitor)
`publicly stated SMR is incompatible with NAS (and RAID), and that their NAS-specific hard
`drives did not use SMR: “Seagate only produces NAS drives that are CMR. We do not have
`any SMR drives in our IronWolf and IronWolf Pro drives, which are NAS solutions…[W]e
`don’t recommend SMR for NAS… Seagate will always recommend the correct drive
`technology for the right application.” 11 (Emphasis added.)
`On April 20, 2020, six days after the Blocks and Files article was published, as
`the fiasco and condemnation continued to snowball, WDC posted a public statement about the
`matter on a blog post on its website.12 In the post, WDC acknowledged that its 2TB–6TB WD
`Red NAS hard drives utilized DM-SMR (drive-managed SMR technology). Meanwhile, WDC
`had publicly admitted in its statement to Blocks and Files that they had never previously
`disclosed that it had sneaked SMR technology into these previously CMR hard drives, stating:
`“You are correct that we do not specify recording technology in our WD Red HDD
`documentation.”13
`Incredibly, WDC claimed in the blog post that the SMR technology they
`sneaked into the WD Red NAS hard drives was nevertheless appropriate because “The data
`intensity of typical small business/home NAS workloads is intermittent, leaving sufficient idle
`9 E.g., see Extreme Tech article dated April 24, 2020, at
`https://www.extremetech.com/computing/309730-western-digital-comes-clean-shares-which-
`hard-drives-use-smr; Ars Technica article dated April 17, 2020, at
`https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/04/caveat-emptor-smr-disks-are-being-submarined-into-
`unexpected-channels/.
`10 See https://blocksandfiles.com/2020/04/15/shingled-drives-have-non-shingled-zones-for-
`caching-writes/.
`11 See https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/04/seagate-says-network-attached-
`storage-and-smr-dont-mix/.
`12 See https://blog.westerndigital.com/wd-red-nas-drives/.
`13 See https://blocksandfiles.com/2020/04/14/wd-red-nas-drives-shingled-magnetic-recording/.
`HATTIS & LU