SAN FRANCISCO - Monsanto Co. filed a notice of supplemental authority in California federal court on June 12 that it contends supports its motion for summary judgment based on a failure of general causation proof in the multidistrict litigation for Roundup (In re: Roundup Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2741, N.D. Calif.).
OAKLAND, Calif. - A marketing firm that deployed "zombie" cookies on the mobile devices of Verizon Wireless users violated New York consumer law, two wireless users argue in a June 13 brief in California federal court, claiming trespass and opposing the defendant's motion to dismiss (Anthony Henson, et al. v. Turn Inc., No. 4:15-cv-01497, N.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A purchaser of a vehicle who alleges that a lender made it impossible for her to make online payments and caused her to have a decreased credit score sued the lender on June 13 in a California state court, asserting causes of action for violation of the state unfair competition law (UCL) and breach of contract (Madeleine I. Turskey v. Ally Financial Inc., No. 18 -567229, Calif. Super., San Francisco Co.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A shareholder on June 13 sued an investment adviser and its board of directors in California federal court, seeking to halt the company's proposed merger deal with a financial planning firm until information necessary for shareholders to vote on the proposed deal is disclosed (Jerry Rubenstein v. Financial Engines Inc., et al., No. 18-3542, N.D. Calif.).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. - An asbestos judgment winner can proceed with her appeal in a California court to recover more than $360,000 from Chapter 11 debtor Kaiser Gypsum Co., despite objections by the company and its primary insurer, a North Carolina federal bankruptcy judge ruled June 14 in a minute order lifting the automatic bankruptcy stay (In re Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc., et al., No. 16-31602, W.D. N.C. Bkcy.).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. - A federal judge in California on June 12 denied a motion by the California attorney general that sought to amend a ruling issued by the court in February that enjoined the state of California from requiring companies to issue a warning regarding glyphosate (National Association of Wheat Growers, et al. v. Lauren Zeise, et al., No. 17-2401, E.D. Calif.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A District of Columbia federal judge on June 11 granted a motion to certify for interlocutory appeal a March order to allow the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to rule on whether the jurisdictional limits outlined in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, 137 S. Ct. 1773 (2017), extend to unnamed, nonresident members of a putative nationwide class in federal court (Michael Molock, et al. v. Whole Foods Market Group, Inc., No. 16-2483, D. D.C., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97428).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge on June 11 granted a bank's motion to dismiss a borrower's claim for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) for failure to state a claim, but allowed most of her claims to proceed, including a cause of action for breach of California's Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR) (Ursula Ogamba v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 2:17-cv-01754, E.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97803).
SAN DIEGO - A California federal magistrate judge on June 8 found that a patent owner's counsel did not waive attorney-client privilege regarding certain proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) over a water park ride patent, partly denying a motion to compel his deposition but granting the defendant's motion related to nonprivileged communications and requests for production (RFPs) (Whitewater West Industries Ltd. v. Pacific Surf Designs Inc., et al., No. 3:17-cv-01118, S.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96970).
LOS ANGELES - In a June 7 order, a federal judge in California denied motions to dismiss in a securities class action lawsuit against social media company Snap Inc., certain of its senior executives and directors and underwriters of the company's initial public offering (IPO), ruling that shareholders properly pleaded a material misrepresentation or omission and scienter, as well as damages, in making their federal securities law claims (In re Snap Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 17-3679, C.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97704).
SAN DIEGO - After finding that a consumer's claims for unlawful conduct against a bank in violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) and other laws were directed only at him and not the public at large, a California federal judge on June 11 held that the causes of action were subject to arbitration and granted the bank's motion to compel (Jesse Croucier v. Credit One Bank, N.A., et al., No. 18cv20, S.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97756).
LOS ANGELES - A landscape company says in its June 10 reply brief to a California federal court that service of suit was defective regarding a reinsurer's petition seeking confirmation of a $82,130.44 arbitration award (Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Company Inc. v. O'Connell Landscape Maintenance Inc., No. 18-00683, C.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal magistrate judge on June 7 dismissed a borrower's claims for violation of the California Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR) and California's unfair competition law (UCL) with leave to amend, holding that she failed to plead sufficient facts to show that a lender violated the laws in relation to a loan modification (Julie Galvez v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al., No. 17-cv-06003, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96300).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A federal judge in California on June 8 denied a general practitioner's motion for acquittal on charges of health care fraud, finding that the spreadsheets and explanation of benefit (EOB) documents presented by the government constituted sufficient evidence showing that the doctor submitted fraudulent claims to insurance companies (United States of America v. Vilasini Ganesh, et al., No. 16cr00211, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97028).
SAN FRANCISCO - In a June 6 response brief, a data analytics firm tells the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a recent California federal court ruling in favor of Ticketmaster LLC is not applicable to the present appeal regarding access under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) (hiQ Labs Inc. v. LinkedIn Corp., No. 17-16783, 9th Cir.).
OAKLAND, Calif. - One year after a YouTube user was denied certiorari on questions of fair use and good faith surrounding the takedown provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a California federal magistrate judge announced in a June 6 minute entry that the parties in the 11-year old case had "reached in principle" a settlement of the remaining issues (Stephanie Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., et al., No. 4:07-cv-03783, N.D. Calif.).
SAN DIEGO - A California federal judge on June 5 refused to dismiss claims for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) and breach of warranty asserted by a consumer who alleges that a coffee filter's label was misleading, finding that she pleaded sufficient allegations in support of her claims against the seller and maker of the filter (Gina Beckman v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., et al., No. 17-cv-02249, S.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95414).
LOS ANGELES - In a dispute seeking confirmation of a $82,130.44 arbitration award, a reinsurer argues in a June 4 motion in California federal court that a landscape company's motion to dismiss is "procedurally and substantively improper" (Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Company Inc. v. O'Connell Landscape Maintenance Inc., No. 18-00683, C.D. Calif.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A growing list of class actions against Facebook Inc. over the sharing of millions of social network users' personal data by a third-party app developer will be centralized in California federal court, the U.S. Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation (JPMDL) ruled June 6, granting a motion to transfer by two of the plaintiffs (In re Facebook Inc., Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, No. 2843, JPMDL).
LOS ANGELES - Intentional tort claims escape ERISA preemption, but the failure to allege that insurance defendants denied payments specifically to assist a competing provider dooms a chiropractic care provider's unfair competition law (UCL) claim, a California appeals court held in an opinion published June 1 (Port Medical Wellness Inc. v. Connecticut General Life Insurance Co., et al., No. B275874, Calif. App., 2nd Dist.).