SAN FRANCISCO - In a motion seeking interlocutory review, an insurer argues that whether the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires an insurer to provide access to lactation services or merely forbids financial barriers to obtaining such services is exactly the type of question the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals should address and, in an answer to the complaint filed Sept. 19 in a California federal court, the insurer says the plaintiffs' fail to state a claim under either the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and the ACA on which relief can be based (Rachel Condry, et al. v. UnitedHealth Group Inc., et al., No. 17-183, N.D. Calif.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A California digital company on Sept. 20 announced that its subsidiaries have filed a notice of international arbitration against Toshiba Corp. in relation to flash-memory drive joint ventures.
LOS ANGELES - A California panel on Sept. 18 affirmed a trial court's decision to grant a hotel management company's strategic lawsuit against public participation motion in relation to a tenant's causes of action for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL), invasion of privacy and other claims, finding that the tenant waived any argument on appeal after he failed to oppose the motion (Troy A. Stewart v. Extended Stay America, et al., No. B272333, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 4, 2017 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 6383).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge on Sept. 14 awarded a disability claimant more than $100,000 in attorney fees after determining that the award was warranted because the claimant achieved "some degree" of success on the merits (Robert Bosley v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., No. 16-00139, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149453).
SAN DIEGO - After finding that a consumer sufficiently pleaded that she relied on various representations regarding the health benefits of coconut oil, a California federal judge on Sept. 18 denied a motion filed by the maker of the product to dismiss the purchaser's claims for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) and other causes of action (Syndi Tracton v. Viva Labs Inc., No. 16-cv-2772, S.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151178).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - In a Sept. 15 brief in California federal court, a customer of Google Inc.'s AdWords program argues that he sufficiently alleged unfair competition and false advertising claims based on click fraud charges he incurred due to Google's misrepresentations about the frequency of and protection against fraudulent clicks (Gurminder Singh v. Google Inc., No. 5:16-cv-03734, N.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge erred in holding that the overall configuration of a live auction television show is functional, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Sept. 15, reversing and remanding the denial of preliminary injunctive relief in a trade dress infringement and trade secret misappropriation case (VBS Distribution Inc. v. Nutrivita Inc., et al., No. 17-11598, 9th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 17951).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge on Sept. 14 awarded attorney fees and incentive awards following the $60.8 million settlement reached between Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and a class of drivers who brought wage claims against their employer, but in amounts below those requested by the plaintiffs (Charles Ridgeway, et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., No. 08-cv-05221, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149440).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. - A California federal judge on Sept. 14 denied a developer's request to disqualify counsel hired by a tenant who asserts claims for breach of contract and violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) in relation to two leases, finding that the counsel did not complete any ongoing work for the developer after obtaining the tenant as a client (Regal Cinemas Inc. v. Shops at Summerlin North LP, et al., No. 2:16-cv-02854, E.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149497).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - Voicing its intention to appeal a California federal judge's ruling ordering it to comply with a warrant issued under the Stored Communications Act (SCA) seeking production of foreign-stored user emails, Google Inc. on Sept. 13 moved for an order of civil contempt related to its noncompliance, to establish appellate jurisdiction (In re: Search of Content That is Stored at Premises Controlled by Google, No. 3:16-mc-80263, N.D. Calif.).
FRESNO, Calif. - A U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California judge on Sept. 14 dismissed a class complaint accusing several gyms and their franchisor of violating the Electronic Funds Transfer Act (EFTA) following the transfer of memberships, but gave the plaintiffs one more opportunity to amend their complaint while warning them that the "Court's resources are limited" and that the amended pleadings "will be considered to be the best the parties can present" (Jogert Abrantes, et al. v. Fitness 19 LLC, et al., No. 16-903, E.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149435).
OAKLAND, Calif. - After finding that two purchasers of vehicles entered valid settlements with a vehicle maker in relation to the return of their trucks, a California federal judge on Sept. 13 granted summary judgment in favor of the dealer on all of the buyers' claims, including violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) (Michael J. Sansoe, et al. v. Ford Motor Co., No. 13-cv-5043, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148617).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal court must decide on remand whether federal or state law controls - and whether a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision impacts - two asbestos trusts' attempt to enforce a settlement under which an attorney agreed to stop filing claims with the trusts due to his pattern of presenting unreliable evidence, a divided Ninth Circuit panel held Aug. 14 (Michael J. Mandelbrot, et al. v. J.T. Thorpe Settlement Trust and Thorpe Insulation Company Asbestos Settlement Trust, No. 15-56430, 9th Cir.).
OAKLAND, Calif. - The lead plaintiff in a securities class action lawsuit against a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company relied on erroneous information in arguing that the company and certain of its senior executives concealed from investors certain adverse events observed in a phase III clinical trial for the company's hepatitis B drug in violation of federal securities laws, a federal judge in California ruled Sept. 12 in granting the defendants' motion to dismiss (In re Dynavax Securities Litigation, No. 16-6690, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147760).
SAN FRANCISCO - Since a construction company seeks to assert claims for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) as representative claims under state law, rather than as class claims under federal law, a California federal judge on Sept. 12 denied an insurer's motion to strike parts of the company's complaint filed against it in relation to its issuance of general liability insurance policies (Albert D. Seeno Construction Company, et al. v. Aspen Insurance UK Limited, No. 17-cv-03765, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147646).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. - After finding that a biotechnology company failed to show that it is a current or potential competitor of a company that uses the same pharmaceutical ingredient in its product, a California federal judge on Sept. 12 dismissed its claims for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) and other causes of action (Ixchel Pharma LLC v. Biogen Inc., No. 2:17-00715, E.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147742).