FRESNO, Calif. - A casino consultant's state law claims that it suffered damages when an Indian tribe failed to obtain federal approval of a management agreement between the parties cannot be litigated in federal court because they do not implicate a federal law, a federal judge in California held July 27 in granting the tribe's motion to dismiss the consultant's complaint (Osceola Blackwood Ivory Gaming Group, LLC v. Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians, et al., No. 1:17-cv-00394, E.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118065).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A California federal magistrate judge on July 27 permitted Google Inc. to conduct discovery on a sampling of the plaintiffs who have opted into a collective action alleging discriminatory hiring practices under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), while limiting the amount of discovery Google may seek from each plaintiff (Robert Heath, et al. v. Google Inc., No. 5:15-cv-01824, N.D. Calif.).
OAKLAND, Calif. - A California federal judge on July 26 granted a disability claimant's motion to proceed under a pseudonym after determining that the need for anonymity outweighs prejudice to the defendant and the public's interest in knowing the claimant's identity (John Doe v. Lincoln National Life Insurance Co., No. 17-3963, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117110).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. - A Fourth District California Court of Appeal panel on July 27 reversed summary judgment for the city of San Diego after finding that the city was not covered by trail immunity in a suit where a woman claimed that she was hit by a falling tree branch while walking in a city-owned park (Lorin Toeppe v. City of San Diego, No. D069662, Calif. App., 4th Dist., 2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 651).
SAN FRANCISCO - Newly discovered evidence pertaining to a government witness's embezzlement of more than $40,000 from Wells Fargo while working as a branch manager does not warrant reversal of the convictions of three defendants for their roles in a scheme to fraudulently obtain life insurance for strangers who did not want or need the policies, a federal judge in California ruled July 28, finding that the new evidence was merely impeaching and not sufficient to render the witness's testimony totally incredible (United States v. Benham Halali, et al., No. 14-cr-00627, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119038).
SANTA ANA, Calif. - Lead plaintiffs in a securities class action lawsuit against a pharmaceutical company and certain of its executive officers have shown that the defendants issued misrepresentations regarding the clinical trial results for the company's breast cancer treatment drug in violation of federal securities laws, a federal judge in California ruled July 25 in denying the defendants' motion to dismiss (Hsingching Hsu v. Puma Biotechnology Inc., et al., No. 15-0865, C.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A group of Seagate Technology LLC employees on July 27 moved for preliminary approval of a putative class action over a 2016 phishing incident at the company that exposed their personally identifiable information (PII), asking a California federal court to greenlight relief in the form of restitution and identity theft protection, potentially valued at $42 million (Everett Castillo, et al. v. Seagate Technology LLC, No. 3:16-cv-01958, N.D. Calif.).
CHARLESTON, S.C. - After finding that defendants in a bankruptcy court adversary proceeding waived their right to a jury trial and that they may be engaging in forum shopping, a South Carolina federal judge on July 25 refused to withdraw a consolidated case in which an insurer asserts causes of action for fraud and violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) from the bankruptcy court (Twin City Fire Insurance Co. v. Thomas Spry, et al., No. 2:15-cv-01663, D. S.C., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115610).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge on July 25 agreed to permit Oracle America Inc. to amend its complaint against Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. (HPE) to address a California magistrate judge's November 2016 ruling that Oracle's allegations of international copyright infringement were inadequately pleaded (Oracle America Inc. v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, No. 16-1393, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116298).
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge in California on July 26 denied a motion to dismiss filed by defendants in a securities class action lawsuit against GoPro Inc. and certain of its executive officers, ruling that the lead plaintiff in the action properly pleaded a material misrepresentation or omission, scienter and loss causation in making his federal securities law claims (Anton Bielousov v. GoPro Inc., et al., No. 16-6654, N.D. Calif.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117223).
LOS ANGELES - After finding that a borrower's claims for wrongful foreclosure and fraud were not sufficiently pleaded, a California federal judge on July 24 granted a motion filed by lenders to dismiss claims against them with leave to amend and refused to remand the case to a California state court (Jose A. Miranda v. SCME Mortgage Bankers Inc., et al., No. 17-03153, C.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115311).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. - A California federal judge on July 24 refused to remand claims for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) and other causes of action against a bank, finding that complete diversity jurisdiction between the parties exists and that the amount-in-controversy requirement was met (Philip Davidson, et al. v. Wells Fargo Bank, et al., No. 17-00999, C.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116475).
SAN FRANCISCO - The plaintiffs in a putative class action over the sharing of contact information on devices made by Apple Inc. saw their class certification motion denied July 25, with a California federal judge finding that the plaintiffs failed to establish the necessary predominance factors in their false advertising and unfair competition claims against Apple (Marc Opperman, et al. v. Kong Technologies Inc., et al., No. 3:13-CV-00453, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116333).
SAN DIEGO - A California federal judge on July 24 set aside a default ruling entered against the chief operating officer of an apparel company that allegedly infringed on another entity's trademark in violation of federal trademark law and California's unfair competition law (UCL), finding that setting aside the default ruling would not prejudice the owner of the mark (Lights Out Holdings LLC v. Lights Out Apparel LLC, et al., No.16cv2195, S.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115326).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A recent Canadian Supreme Court ruling requiring Google Inc. to remove from all of its worldwide sites links to a trade secret infringer's websites cannot be enforced in the United States, the internet giant argues in a July 24 complaint, asking a California federal court to grant it declaratory relief (Google Inc. v. Equustek Solutions Inc., No. 5:17-cv-04207, N.D. Calif.).