--- title: "Battle Born Lawsuit Against Will Prowse Draws New Attention After Archived Specs Surface" url: "https://camperfaqs.com/battle-born-lawsuit-against-will-prowse-draws-new-attention" author: "Tory Jon" published: "2026-06-18T10:54:51-05:00" modified: "2026-06-18T10:54:54-05:00" --- # Battle Born Lawsuit Against Will Prowse Draws New Attention After Archived Specs Surface The [Battle Born battery lawsuit against YouTuber Will Prowse](https://camperfaqs.com/battle-born-battery-maker-sues-youtuber-will-prowse) has a new twist. Right-to-repair advocate [Louis Rossmann](https://www.youtube.com/@rossmanngroup) is pointing to archived Battle Born documents that appear to show a change in one battery’s published charging specs. The change is getting attention because Dragonfly Energy, Battle Born’s parent company, has accused Prowse of testing batteries outside the company’s specifications. Dragonfly Energy disclosed the lawsuit in a [June 2026 SEC filing](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1847986/000149315226026754/form8-k.htm), saying it had filed a trade libel lawsuit against William Errol Prowse IV and Prowse Publications LLC in Nevada state court. According to the filing, Dragonfly alleges Prowse made false and misleading statements about Battle Born Batteries through monetized online content. The company also says Prowse presented his content as technical analysis while allegedly omitting context, altering batteries before testing them, and running damaged units “out of spec.” The case has attracted attention across the RV, solar, and DIY battery communities because Prowse is known for testing lithium batteries and solar equipment on YouTube. Now, Rossmann is raising questions about one specific part of the dispute: Battle Born’s published charge-current specifications. ## Archived and Current Data Sheets Show Different Charge Limits Rossmann’s claim centers on Battle Born’s BB1275 battery, a 75Ah 12V LiFePO4 model. In his video, Rossmann said an older Battle Born data sheet listed the BB1275 battery’s maximum charge current at 50 amps. We reviewed an [archived version of that BB1275 data sheet](https://web.archive.org/web/20251016152325/https://battlebornbatteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/BB1275-Standard-Datasheet_V2-compressed.pdf) through the Wayback Machine, and the document does list “Max Charge Current” as 50A. The same archived sheet identifies the model as BB1275 and lists the battery capacity as 75Ah. Battle Born’s current product page for the [75Ah 12V Group 24 LiFePO4 Deep Cycle Battery](https://battlebornbatteries.com/products/75ah-12v-group-24-lifepo4-deep-cycle-battery/) also identifies the product as model BB1275. However, the current [BB1275 data sheet](https://battlebornbatteries.com/cdn/shop/files/BB1275_Data_Sheet.pdf?v=7544652471541079049) on Battle Born’s website lists “Max Charge Current” as 37.5A. That means an archived BB1275 data sheet listed a 50A max charge current, while the current BB1275 data sheet lists 37.5A for the same model. The documents alone do not explain why the number changed. ## Why the Difference Is Getting Attention Rossmann’s claim is that the difference matters because Dragonfly’s lawsuit accuses Prowse of running batteries outside published specifications. In one of his videos, Rossmann said the complaint alleges Prowse charged a battery at 49 amps, which Dragonfly described as above the 37.5A maximum specified in the manual. Rossmann argues that an older Battle Born data sheet listed a higher 50A maximum charge current, which would make the same 49A charge rate appear to fall within the older published limit for the BB1275 battery. We have not reviewed the full court complaint. Dragonfly’s SEC filing does not provide the detailed charge-current language Rossmann discussed, but it does say the company alleges Prowse ran batteries “out of spec.” ## What This Does and Does Not Prove The archived data sheet and current data sheet appear to show different published max charge-current ratings for the same BB1275 model. That does not, by itself, prove why the number changed. Manufacturers can revise manuals and technical specifications for many reasons, including product updates, testing revisions, safety guidance, engineering changes, or documentation corrections. The timing and context are why the change is drawing attention, especially because the lawsuit involves claims about whether Prowse’s testing was performed within the proper specifications. At this stage, the court has not ruled on the claims in Dragonfly’s lawsuit, and the archived specification does not establish that Dragonfly changed documentation for any improper reason. ## What RV Owners Should Take From This For RV owners, the immediate takeaway is not that every Battle Born battery is unsafe or that the lawsuit has already been decided. The more practical takeaway is that battery owners should keep copies of the documentation that came with their specific battery and follow the current manufacturer guidance for their model. Lithium battery systems can vary by model, age, battery management system, charging equipment, and installation. Anyone concerned about their own setup should check the exact model number, data sheet, charger settings, and installation instructions. The lawsuit between Dragonfly Energy and Prowse is still an active legal dispute. The newly surfaced archived specifications add another layer to the public debate, but the legal claims will depend on the evidence presented in court.