SAN DIEGO - After finding that a restaurant chain's shared tip-pooling policy is not unlawful, a California federal judge on Feb. 28 dismissed a former server's claims for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) and for penalties under the California's Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) (Brendan Wilkes v. Benihana Inc., et al., No. 16cv2219, S.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29127).
SAN FRANCISCO - After finding that a company's claims related to a former employee's alleged theft of proprietary information for violation of California Penal Code Section 502 and for conversion were based on the same facts as its claims for misappropriation of trade secrets, a California federal judge on March 1 found that the claims were preempted by the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (CUTSA) (Henry Schein Inc. v. Jennifer Cook, et al., No. 16-cv-03166, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29183).
VENTURA, Calif. - A California appeals panel on March 1 affirmed a jury verdict against an excess insurer in an equitable contribution dispute over $3.5 million that the primary insurer paid to settle a lawsuit arising from a deadly outbreak of hepatitis A caused by contaminated onions that were marketed by the wholesaler insured (National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford v. Great American Insurance Co., No. B264238, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 6, 2017 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1453).
SAN FRANCISCO - Government agencies' "[e]mployees' communications about official agency business may be subject to" disclosure under the California Public Records Act (CPRA) even if they were sent or received via personal email or phone accounts, the California Supreme Court ruled March 2, reversing and remanding an appeals court's decision (City of San Jose, et al. v. The Superior Court of Santa Clara County and Ted Smith, No. S218066, Calif. Sup., 2017 Cal. LEXIS 1607).
OAKLAND, Calif. - In a March 1 motion in California federal court, the plaintiffs in a class action accusing Facebook Inc. of privacy violations in its scanning of users' private messages (PMs) seek preliminary approval of a settlement with the social network, noting changes that Facebook has made to its allegedly illegal practices (Matthew Campbell, et al. v. Facebook Inc., No. 4:13-cv-05996, N.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge on Feb. 28 refused to grant a retailer's motion to dismiss claims for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) and for false advertising, but granted dismissal with leave to amend in relation to claims for products that he did not purchase (William Rushing v. Williams-Sonoma Inc., et al., No. 16-cv-01421, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28227).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A California federal judge on Feb. 24 partially granted a motion filed by a former employee of a company that makes high-voltage power conversion systems to dismiss certain claims related to his alleged theft of proprietary information to obtain patents, finding that some of the claims should be adjudicated under Korean law (Power Integrations Inc. v. Chan-Woong Park, No. 16-cv-02367, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26467).
SAN FRANCISCO - A lead plaintiff in a securities class action has failed to show that a developer of educational entertainment for children and two of its executive officers acted with scienter in failing to report goodwill impairment for the second quarter of 2015, but the lead plaintiff has pleaded scienter regarding the defendants' failure to take certain write-offs in the third quarter of the fiscal year, a federal judge in California ruled Feb. 24 in granting in part and denying in part the defendants' motion to dismiss (In re LeapFrog Enterprises Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 15-0347, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26398).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - Under a settlement agreement that was granted final approval by a California federal judge on Feb. 24, Avon Products Inc. will pay $1.8 million to end a class complaint filed by California district sales managers (DSMs) who alleged that they were improperly denied overtime wages (Jacqueline Cavalier Nelson v. Avon Products, Inc., et al., No. 13-2276, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26451).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - In a Feb. 23 motion in California federal court, the plaintiffs in a putative class action over Google Inc.'s AdWords program seek preliminary approval of a $22.5 million settlement of their claims against the internet giant under California's unfair competition law (UCL) and false advertising law (FAL) (In Re Google AdWords Litigation, No. 5:08-cv-03369, N.D. Calif.).
MARSHALL, Texas - A Texas infringement plaintiff prevailed Feb. 27 in response to a motion by Broadcom Ltd. and several other defendants to transfer the dispute to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. Broadcom Ltd., et al., No. 16-134, E.D. Texas, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26755).
FRESNO, Calif. - A California federal judge on Feb. 24 dismissed as preempted all of a plaintiff's claims involving a Medtronic Inc. SynchroMed II drug pump but gave the plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within 21 days (Michael Martin v. Medtronic, Inc., et al., No. 15-994, E.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26350).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A California appeals panel on Feb. 24 upheld a trial court's decision to deny a man's request for a writ of mandate that would allow him to retain unemployment benefits he received from November 2008 through March 2013, finding that he obtained the benefits through misrepresentations (Abhijit Prasad v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, No. H041590, Calif. App., 6th Dist., 2017 Calif. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1349).
SAN FRANCISCO - Waymo LLC - a Google Inc. division devoted to the development of self-driving cars - accused Uber Technologies Inc. of "calculated theft" in a patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Feb. 23 (Waymo LLC v. Uber Technologies Inc., et al., No. 17-939, N.D. Calif.).
SAN DIEGO - A California federal judge on Feb. 22 denied preliminary approval of a $2 million settlement proposed by Costco Wholesale Corp. to end truck drivers' wage claims and ordered plaintiffs' counsel to show why sanctions should not be imposed after counsel agreed to file an amended complaint that added a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. 201, et seq., claim that was subsequently released in the settlement agreement without any additional compensation to the class (Douglas Thompson, et al. v. Costco Wholesale Corporation, et al., No. 14-2778, S.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24964).