Motorola batteries
1 report to CPSC, the latest made May 30, 2012. A report isn’t a recall.
Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CPSC’s own search is on saferproducts.gov.
At a glance
From SaferProducts.gov, released Oct 25, 2026.
- 1report to CPSC
- May 30, 2012the latest report was made
- May 30, 2012the earliest
- 0with the company’s comments
- Brand
- Motorola
- Maker
- Motorola Mobility, Inc.Makers, importers or sellers, as the reports name them
- Product
- BatteriesCPSC’s product type: Batteries (code 884), in Electronics: Batteries & Chargers
By month
The numbers, as a table
| Month | Reports |
|---|---|
| May 2012 | 1 |
How badly anyone was hurt
- No one hurt 1 CPSC: Incident, No Injury
As each report says it, in short words; CPSC’s own words are under each.
The reports, as CPSC published them
Reports people made to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. CPSC publishes each one after sending it to the company named, and doesn’t guarantee they’re accurate. A report isn’t a recall.
Each report is the words of the person who made it, as CPSC published them. The company’s comments, where CPSC published any, are set apart as the company’s own.
CPSC, SaferProducts.gov public database export. Released Oct 25, 2026. Updated daily.
-
No one hurt Made May 30, 2012, sent to the company Aug 10, 2012, published by CPSC Aug 24, 2012
The product, in the report: Rechargeable batteries
The reporter stated that she purchased approximately 100-200 phones from a retailer. The reporter stated that she noticed that she was receiving complaints in regards to the phones. She stated that the approximately 20 phones were reported back to her, informing her that the phones would not reboot, turn on, the phone would turn hot, the phone started to emit smoke. The reporter stated that she replaced the phones for the employees. The reporter stated that she realized that every phone that she received back as damaged, the battery had expanded.
The reporter stated that all the batteries are the same models and she stated that all experienced the same defects. The reporter stated that no one was injured.
The reporter stated that she did not log any specific details as to how the phones were being used.
The reporter believes that these batteries should be investigated because they pose a burning hazard consumer.
- Model
- BT60
- Bought from
- Sprint PCS
- Bought
- Nov 15, 2009, about then
- Where
- Itasca, Illinois: Other Public Property/
Office - Who was involved
- Unknown
- The reporter’s relation to them
- Unspecified
- As this report names them
- Brand Motorola, made or sold by Motorola Mobility, Inc.
- How badly, in CPSC’s words
- Incident, No Injury
CPSC’s disclaimer
Disclaimer: CPSC does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of the Publicly Available Consumer Product Safety Information Database on SaferProducts.gov, particularly with respect to information submitted by people outside of CPSC.
Word for word, from the disclaimer in CPSC’s export.
Sources
Sources
-
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, SaferProducts.gov public database export.
Released Oct 25, 2026 and checked Oct 25, 2026. Updated daily. Public domain (U.S. Government work). CPSC asks to be credited, and that no endorsement be implied.
Reports of harm are from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), on SaferProducts.gov. CPSC does not endorse Hearth Record.