SAN JOSE, Calif. - A California federal magistrate judge on July 5 excluded most royalty and damages opinions of two experts in a patent dispute, saying that the experts' "methodologically unsound opinion testimony" should not be presented to a jury (Good Technology Corporation, et al., v. MobileIron, Inc., No. 5:12-cv-05826, N.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87347).
OAKLAND, Calif. - A federal judge in California on July 6 reserved ruling on a state unfair competition law (UCL) claim in a home-loan dispute until the plaintiff has time to respond to a show-cause order as to why her claim for an alleged violation of California Civil Code Section 2923.5 should not be dismissed as being time-barred (Cecille Q. Paed, et al. v. Wells Fargo Bank, No. 15-1980, N.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87345).
SAN FRANCISCO - A divided panel of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 6 ruled that the manner in which Amazon.com Inc.'s website responds to a shopper's search request could create a likelihood of confusion (Multi Time Machine Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc. and Amazon Services LLC, No. 13-55575, 9th Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11554).
SAN DIEGO - In a July 2 unpublished opinion, a California appeals court affirmed a class action settlement over the objections of a class member in a case accusing QuickTrim LLC of improperly labeling its product in violation of the state's unfair competition law (UCL) (Teresa Anaya, et al. v. QuickTrim, et al., No. D067432, Calif. App., 4th Dist., Div. 1; 2015 Ca. App. Unpub. LEXIS 4697).
SAN FRANCISCO - Apple Inc. did not establish that AT&T Mobility, its alleged co-conspirator in a putative antitrust class action related to service for Apple's iPhones, was a necessary party to the action, a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel majority ruled June 29, reversing a trial court's dismissal of the case for failure to join AT&T, per Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 (Zack Ward, et al. v. Apple Inc., No. 12-17805, 9th Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11065).
PHILADELPHIA - A holding by a New Jersey federal judge that a settlement of patent litigation that involves only an agreement to relinquish the right to produce an "authorized generic" (no-AG agreement) did not implicate federal antitrust law was vacated by the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 26 (King Drug Company of Florence Inc. et al. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC et al., No. 14-1243, 3rd Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10859).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on June 29 declined to grant certiorari in a challenge to an appellate court's ruling that an eyelash growth product is actually a drug that was sold without approval in violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) (Athena Cosmetics, Inc. v. Allergan, Inc., No. 13-1379, U.S. Sup.).
SANTA ANA, Calif. - A federal judge in California on June 24 dismissed all claims, including violations of the state's unfair competition law (UCL), in a home mortgage modification dispute, saying the plaintiff failed to plead her claims with the particularity required (Cozette Hanich v. Citimortgage Inc., No. 15-557, C.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82170).
LOS ANGELES - The putative class plaintiffs in a suit alleging that e-cigarette manufacturer NJOY Inc. misrepresented the health effects of using its products lack standing, NJOY told a federal judge June 22, opposing a motion for class certification (In re NJOY Inc. Consumer Class Action, No. 14-00428-MMM, consolidated with No. 14-00427-MMM, C.D. Calif.).
PASADENA, Calif. - In a June 23 unpublished per curiam opinion, a panel of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a lower court's decision granting class action status in a case accusing a dietary supplement manufacturer of misleading consumers in violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) as to the effectiveness of its product, saying the decision did not support a determination that all class members received the same alleged misrepresentation (Arleen Cabral v. Supple, No. 13-55943, 9th Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10612).
LOS ANGELES - The primary jurisdiction doctrine does not bar a suit alleging that the manufacturer of infant formula made false representations and engaged in misleading practices in the marketing of its product, a federal judge in California ruled June 18 (Oula Zakaria v. Gerber Products Co., et al., No. 15-200, C.D. Calif.).
OAKLAND, Calif. - A California federal judge on June 15 granted a motion to dismiss a class complaint accusing a smoke detector manufacturer of failing to warn consumers that ionization smoke detectors are what the plaintiff calls "Hazardous Smoke Detectors" (Cynthia Bird v. First Alert, Inc., et al., No. 14-3585, N.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77209).
PHILADELPHIA - A Pennsylvania federal judge on June 17 approved a $1.2 billion settlement between Cephalon Inc. and the Federal Trade Commission in an antitrust battle accusing the company of engineering reverse payments with generic-drug makers made in connection with the patented prescription sleep-disorder drug Provigil (Federal Trade Commission v. Cephalon Inc., No. 08-2141, E.D. Pa.).
This is a test - June 20 2015
LOS ANGELES - A California federal judge on June 15 denied in part a motion by Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc. to dismiss a putative class action by former employees related to a 2014 data breach, finding that the plaintiffs had standing to sue and that they sufficiently alleged negligence and unfair competition claims (Michael Corona, et al. v. Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc., No. 2:14-cv-09600, C.D. Calif.).
LOS ANGELES - A California appeals court in a June 12 unpublished opinion affirmed an order denying a petition to compel arbitration in a suit accusing a grocery store chain of breaching its contract and violating, among other things, the state's unfair competition law (UCL) by ending its relationship with the plaintiff pretzel company and entering into a contract with the company that manufactured the plaintiff's pretzels for the store (Maxim Marketing Corp. v. Trader Joe's Co., No. B258308, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 3; 2015 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 4095).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - In a motion seeking preliminary approval of a settlement, the representatives of a putative class LinkedIn Corp. users told a California federal judge on June 11 that the professionally oriented social network operator had agreed to pay $13 million to settle their unfair competition and publicity rights claims against it (Paul Perkins, et al. v. LinkedIn Corp., No. 5:13-cv-04303, N.D. Calif.).
FRESNO, Calif. - A federal judge in California on June 10 declined to dismiss a state unfair competition claim (UCL) and an unjust enrichment claim brought under Utah law from a class action lawsuit accusing a homebuilder of instituting an illegal loan program that induced the placement of borrowers into its loan program, which had less favorable terms than they would have otherwise received (Luis Cabrales v. Castle & Cook Mortgage, No. 14-1138, E.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76636).
LOS ANGELES - A federal judge in California on June 10 allowed three claims brought under the state's unfair competition law (UCL) to continue in a dispute over the dissolving of a 7-Eleven franchise but dismissed claims for conversion, negligent interference and racial discrimination (Dallas and Lashmi Inc., et al. v. 7-Eleven Inc., No. 15-2044, C.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75348).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and Lorillard Tobacco Co. may transfer several of their cigarette brands to British tobacco company Imperial Tobacco Group (ITG), a federal judge in the District of Columbia held June 8 (United States v. Philip Morris USA Inc., et al., No. 99-2496, D. D.C.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73464).
FRESNO, Calif. - A federal judge in California on June 5 declined to dismiss a class action lawsuit accusing an employer of violating wage and labor laws and the state's unfair competition law (UCL) by allegedly failing to pay employees for non-piecework completed (Jaime Perez, et al. v. Sun Pacific Farming Cooperative Inc., No. 15-259, E.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73986).
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge in California on June 5 declined to dismiss a class action lawsuit accusing Pepsico Inc. of violating state laws, including the unfair competition law (UCL), by misleading the public about the levels of the harmful and carcinogenic chemical called 4-Methylimidazole (4-Mel) contained in its Pepsi beverages (Stacy Sciortino, et al. v. Pepsico Inc., Nos. 14-478, 14-713, 14-1099, 14-1105, 14-1192, 14-1193, 14-1316, 14-1316, N.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73336).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A federal judge in California on June 5 dismissed a state unfair competition law (UCL) claim from a dispute over whether an enterprise mobility management (EMM) solutions provider disseminated marketing materials disparaging the quality of the plaintiff's mobile data and device management technologies but allowed claims brought under the Lanham Act to continue (Good Technology Corp., et al. v. MobileIron Inc., No. 12-5826, N.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73271).
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge in California on May 27 granted plaintiffs' two motions for partial summary judgment in their class action suit accusing a manufacturer of cosmetic products of improperly labeling its products as organic in violation of the state's unfair competition law (UCL), finding that California Organic Products Act (COPA) violations are "predicate unlawful acts" under the UCL and that representations on COPA-violating products are per se "material" under the UCL, that such representations are per se deceptive under the UCL's fraud prong and that material misrepresentations create a "presumption of classwide reliance" under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) (Rosminah Brown, et al. v. The Hain Celestial Group Inc., No. 11-3082, N.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67912).
LOS ANGELES - A federal judge in California on May 27 dismissed claims, including one brought under the state's unfair competition law (UCL), accusing the manufacturer of skin care products of falsely advertising its products anti-aging benefits (Geri Marshall v. PH Beauty Labs Inc., No. 15-2101, C.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68636).