LOS ANGELES - A California federal judge on Nov. 6 entered a default ruling in favor of a health and fitness company on its claims for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) and trademark infringement against a company that was selling its products online, awarding the owner of the trademarks $213,731.02 in damages and fees (Beachbody LLC v. Power Trade Direct, et al., No. 17-2093, C.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 183739).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on Nov. 6 issued an order granting in part a motion filed by U.S. Solicitor General Noel J. Francisco to participate in oral arguments as amicus curiae in an appeal of a California Superior Court ruling that shareholders in a securities class action are not preempted from bringing their claims under the Securities Act of 1933 by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA) because the provisions of SLUSA divest state courts of jurisdiction over Securities Act claims (Cyan Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, et al., No. 15-1439, U.S. Sup.).
OAKLAND, Calif. - A California federal judge on Nov. 3 granted a material supplier's insurer's motion to dismiss a third-party complaint brought by another insurer seeking contribution for underlying defenses costs in a construction defects lawsuit (Webcor Construction, LP, et al. vs. Zurich American Insurance Co., et al., No. 17-02220, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182928).
LOS ANGELES - A federal judge in California on Nov. 2 granted in part a motion to dismiss filed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ruling that three environmental groups cannot claim that the agency failed to follow a nondiscretionary duty under the Clean Water Act (CWA) to require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for dischargers of storm water runoff into three watersheds despite recognizing that the discharges negatively affect water quality (Los Angeles Waterkeeper v. Scott Pruitt, No. 17-CV-3454-SVW, C.D. Calif.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - On Nov. 2, a California federal judge granted preliminary injunctive relief to stop domestic enforcement of a Canadian Supreme Court requiring Google LLC to remove listings for a trade secret infringing firm from all of its websites globally, with the judge finding that the "order undermines the policy goals of [the Communications Decency Act (CDA)] and threatens free speech on the global internet" (Google LLC v. Equustek Solutions Inc., No. 5:17-cv-04207, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182194).
LOS ANGELES - Although part of a borrower's claim for violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) asserted a violation of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), a California federal judge on Nov. 1 found that removal by a group of mortgage-related entities was improper and remanded the case to state court (Nathan D. La Moure v. Harborview Mortgage Loan Trust, et al., No. 5:17-cv-01966, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182064).
NEW ORLEANS - Two California residents who owned and operated a medical equipment store were sentenced by a federal judge in Louisiana on Nov. 2 for their roles in a $38 million fraud scheme centering around the distribution of talking glucose meters that were not medically needed and were often not even requested (United States of America v. Geoffrey Ricketts, et al., No. 15cr153, E.D. La.).
OAKLAND, Calif. - Even conservative estimates put the amount in controversy in a wage-and-hour class complaint filed by a mobile phone company technician above the Class Action Fairness Act's (CAFA) $5 million threshold, a California federal judge ruled Nov. 2, denying the technician's motion to remand (Jesse Black v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., No. 17-4151, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182109).
LOS ANGELES - After finding that the purchaser of allegedly defective pork products failed to show that the seller of the products violated California's unfair competition law (UCL) or breached contracts for the sale and delivery of the products, a California federal judge on Nov. 1 dismissed its counterclaims with leave to amend (Pini USA Inc., et al. v. NB Global Commodities LLC, No. 2:17-CV-04763, C.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181235).
CHICAGO - A class complaint accusing American Honda Motor Co. Inc. of warranty violations for failing to cover the cost to replace wiring covered in a soy-based product that was allegedly eaten by rodents belongs in California based primarily on the interest of justice, an Illinois federal judge ruled Nov. 2, granting a motion to transfer filed by the defendant (Michael Preston, et al. v. American Honda Motor Company, Inc., No. 17-3549, N.D. Ill., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181635).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. - After finding that the sellers of audio components failed to properly respond to allegations that they infringed on trademarks and violated California's unfair competition law (UCL) asserted by a competitor, a California federal judge on Oct. 31 struck their answer in its entirety with leave to amend (JL Audio Inc. v. Dia Saif, et al., No. 2:16-cv-00377, E.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180576).
LOS ANGELES - In an unpublished opinion issued Oct. 31, a California appellate panel affirmed a defense verdict in favor of Target Corp. in a premises liability suit because the woman who cut herself on a price sign failed to file the complete record with her appeal (Mahnaz Sadanian v. Target Corporation, No. B268653, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 8, 2017 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7467).
FRESNO, Calif. - A jury must first decide whether insureds validly assigned their rights to health insurance coverage to a medical provider before the surviving claims can proceed to a jury or bench trial, a federal judge in California held Oct. 31 (John B. Hackert v. Cigna Health and Life Insurance Co., et al., Cigna Health and Life Insurance Co., et al. v. John B. Hackert, No. 15-1248, E.D. Calif.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180569).
SAN FRANCISCO - A U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California judge on Oct. 30 denied a motion by Bosch GmbH and Bosch LLC (collectively, Bosch) to dismiss a second amended class complaint filed by Volkswagen-branded franchise dealers who accuse Bosch of conspiring with Volkswagen AG and related entitled to develop and use defeat devices in Volkswagen's "clean diesel" vehicles to evade United States emission standards (In re: Volkswagen "Clean Diesel" Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, No. 15-2672, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179652).
SAN FRANCISCO - Although a United Kingdom limited company intentionally copied a competitor's logos for reproduction on its newsletters, the intentionally infringing acts were not expressly aimed at the state of California, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Nov. 1, affirming dismissal of a copyright infringement action (Axiom Foods Inc., et al. v. Acerchem UK Limited, No. 15-56450, 9th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 21801).
SAN FRANCISCO - The plaintiffs in the multidistrict litigation for the herbicide Roundup on Oct. 27 filed a brief in California federal court, contending that there is "overwhelming evidence - whether it be the epidemiology, toxicology, or mechanistic data - that exposure to glyphosate-based formulations (GBFs) causes" non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) (In re: Roundup Products Liability Litigation, No. 2741 MDL, N.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO - An investor has properly pleaded demand futility in making his claims in a shareholder derivative lawsuit against the board of directors for a security technology company by showing that two of the board members acted in bad faith in deciding to terminate a special committee's investigation into the improper spending of the company's former CEO before it was completed, a federal judge in California ruled Oct. 27 in denying the defendants' motion to dismiss (Ryan Oswald v. Identiv Inc., et al., No. 16-0241, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178676).
SAN DIEGO - A California federal judge on Oct. 30 vacated previous protective orders preventing the defendant in a dispute over the "Comic-Con" trademark from posting online about the litigation, issuing the order in compliance with a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that deemed the internet bans prior restraint under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, U.S. Const. amend. I (San Diego Comic Convention v. Dan Farr Productions, et al., No. 3:14-cv-01865, S.D. Calif.).
SAN DIEGO - After finding that the amount in controversy in a lawsuit filed by a homeowner in relation to a mortgage company's alleged handling of her loan modification application did not meet the federal requirement, a California federal judge on Oct. 27 remanded the case to a state court (Carey M. Ainley v. PHH Mortgage, No. 17-01476, C.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178625).