SAN JOSE, Calif. - The named plaintiffs in a putative class action against Apple Inc. failed to establish their standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution or two California statutes, a California federal judge found Nov. 25, disposing of their claims related to Apple's purported collection of users' personal data via applications (apps) for its iPhones and other "iDevices" (In Re iPhone Application Litigation, No. 5:11-md-02250, N.D. Calif.).
SAN DIEGO - A California resident on Nov. 27 filed a national class action lawsuit seeking refunds for what it says is a misleadingly advertised and unapproved at-home genetic testing kit called 23andMe (Lisa Casey, et al. v. 23andMe, INC., et al., No. 13-2847, S.D. Calif.).
NEW YORK - The federal bankruptcy judge presiding over the Chapter 11 case of AMR Corp., the parent company of American Airlines Inc., on Nov. 27 approved a settlement between American Airlines and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) that will allow the airline to merge with US Airways Inc. and emerge from Chapter 11 bankruptcy (In Re: AMR Corporation, No. 11-15463, Chapter 11, S.D. N.Y. Bkcy.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A man's payment came in response to a letter explaining the debt, breaking the causal connection to any unlawful conduct based on an allegedly deficient demand for payment, a Ninth Circuit panel held Nov. 22 in affirming dismissal of California unfair competition law (UCL) claims (Roderick Wright, et al. v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., No. 12-55319, 9th Cir.; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 23558).
SAN FRANCISCO - Two Pennsylvania residents likely lack standing to pursue their California unfair competition law (UCL) action over an automobile manufacturer's choice of gas tank material but also fail to state a claim under the statute, a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held Nov. 20 (Henry Troup; Veronica Troup v. Toyota Motor Corp., Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc., No. 11-56637, 9th Cir.).
SAN FRANCISCO - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Nov. 18 remanded a product liability action involving an allegedly deceptively marketed snack food product, agreeing that the plaintiff should be allowed to amend his class action complaint (Lee Cheramie v. HBB LLC, No. 12-55148, 9th Cir.; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 23222).
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge on Nov. 18 granted preliminarily approval of a settlement involving unfair competition law (UCL) claims over Cytosport Inc.'s characterization of Muscle Milk products as "healthy" (Claire Delacruz, et al. v. Cytosport Inc., No. 11-3532, N.D. Calif.).
NEW YORK - Apple Inc. on Nov. 15 moved to dismiss an action by the attorneys general of several states which alleges that Apple conspired with publishers to fix prices of electronic books, arguing that the district court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over the states' damages action against Apple because the states have not suffered any injury-in-fact and, therefore, do not have constitutional standing (In re Electronic Books Antitrust Litigation, 11-MD-2293, S.D. N.Y. $(State of Texas, et al. v. Penguin Group (USA) Inc., et al., No. 12 Civ. 3394, S.D. N.Y.$)).
SAN DIEGO - A judge in California on Nov. 15 granted final approval to a $74 million cash settlement between Bayer Corp. and Bayer AG (collectively, Bayer) and California purchasers of the antibiotic Cipro and third-party payers who reimbursed for California purchases of Cipro on claims that Bayer paid drug companies nearly $400 million to drop challenges to Bayer's Cipro patent and to refrain from selling generic versions of the drug (Cipro Cases I and II $(All Actions$), Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding Nos. 4154 and 4220, Calif. Super., San Diego Co.).
BOSTON - A federal judge in Massachusetts on Nov. 14 certified a damages class of end-payers that purchased or provided reimbursements for Nexium on the end-payers' antitrust and consumer protection claims contending that the manufacturer of the heartburn medication and generic drug manufacturers entered into reverse-payment agreements to keep generic versions of the medication out of the market, but the judge denied the end-payers' motion for certification of an injunctive class (In re Nexium $(Esomeprazole$) Antitrust Litigation, No. 12-md-02409, D. Mass.; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162276, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162496).
SAN DIEGO - A California federal judge on Nov. 14 granted final approval of a revised $4 million settlement in a class lawsuit accusing Kellogg Co. of making false advertising claims about its Frosted Mini-Wheats cereal despite earlier concerns that the amount for class members had been reduced while attorney fees and expenses remained unchanged (Harry Dennis, et al. v. Kellogg Co., No. 09-1786, S.D. Calif.; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163118).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on Nov.18 denied a petition for review filed by a class member who objected to the settlement of a class suit accusing Sirius XM Radio Inc. of antitrust violations in connection with the 2008 merger of the only two providers of satellite radio, and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. commented that a judge's requirement that class counsel reflect the class as to race and gender may warrant "future review" (Nicholas Martin v. Carl Blessing, et al., No. 13-169, U.S. Sup.).
PHILADEPHIA - A federal judge in Philadelphia on Nov. 12 denied Comcast Corp.'s motion to strike consumers' motion to recertify a class following the U.S. Supreme Court's reversing the court's motion to certify the class, but the judge permitted Comcast to file a substantive response to the motion to recertify (Stanford Glaberson, et al. v. Comcast Corporation, et al., No. 03-6604, E.D. Pa.; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160890).
SAN FRANCISCO - The California Supreme Court on Nov. 13 declined to either review or depublish an opinion finding that litigation privilege does not bar a state California unfair competition law (UCL) action seeking enforcement of debt collection laws, according to its docket (The People v. Persolve LLC, et al., No. S213424, Calif. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) on Nov. 12 proposed a final judgment with US Airways Group Inc. and American Airlines Inc. under which the DOJ would drop its merger antitrust lawsuit against the airlines if they divest slots and gates at key constrained airports across the country to low-cost carrier airlines (United States of America v. US Airways Group Inc., et al., No. 13-01236, D. D.C.).
LOS ANGELES - Priceline.com Inc.'s disclosure of the potential for "resort fees" above and beyond its charges and a consumer's ability to otherwise avoid them free the company from California unfair competition law (UCL) claims, a state appeals panel affirmed Nov. 7 (Michael Freeman v. Priceline.com Inc., et al., No. B24653, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 2).
SAN FRANCISCO - Parties on Nov. 7 briefed the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on whether a $25 payment made on an allegedly unlawful attempt to collect on a $9,000 automobile debt satisfies the California unfair competition law (UCL) injury standard (Roderick Wright, et al. v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., No. 12-55319, 9th Cir.).
TRENTON, N.J. - A New Jersey appeals court in a Nov. 4 unpublished opinion affirmed the dismissal of chiropractors' challenge to a health insurer's policy provision limiting reimbursement of diagnostic imaging services but ordered the case transferred to the state insurance department for review of a claim alleging violation of a state law requiring group health policies to cover services performed by chiropractors if the services are also reimbursed when provided by other health providers (The Association of New Jersey Chiropractors Inc., et al. v. Horizon Healthcare Services Inc., et al., No. A-6022-11T4, N.J. Super., App. Div.; 2013 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2677).
SAN DIEGO - Injunctive relief and restitution constitute separate remedies under the California unfair competition law (UCL), and lack of standing to pursue one does not bar the other, a California federal judge held Nov. 1 (Gino Maraventano and Neesha Kurji v. Nordstrom Inc., a Washington corporation, and DOES 1-100 inclusive, Gina Balasanyan and Nune Nalbandian, et al. v. Nordstrom Inc., et al. Nos. 10-2671, 11-2609, S.D. Calif.; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157194).
SAN FRANCISCO - A procedure for determining the portion of settlement proceeds to be awarded to certain class members in a consumer antitrust action against Microsoft Corp. does not violate the terms of the underlying $1.1 billion settlement agreement, a California appellate court affirmed Oct. 31 in an unpublished opinion (Charles J. Longo, et al. v. Microsoft Corporation, No. A136531, Calif. App., 1st Dist.; 2013 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7931).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The class suing US Airways Group Inc. and American Airlines Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Nov. 4 moved for permission to intervene in the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) antitrust lawsuit against the airlines by filing an amicus curiae brief (United States of America v. US Airways Group Inc., et al., No. 13-01236, D. D.C.).
SANTA ANA, Calif. - Alleged misrepresentations about the steps a lender would take to help a customer appear to provide adequate basis for a California unfair competition law (UCL) claim, and the resulting home foreclosure appears to constitute an injury, a divided appeals court held Oct. 31 (Richard Lueras v. BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, et al., No. G046799, Calif. App., 4th Dist., Div. 3; 2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 886).
DENVER - The 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Nov. 1 denied Novell Inc.'s petition for rehearing en banc of a panel ruling that Novell failed to present evidence sufficient for a jury to find that Microsoft Corp. unlawfully used its dominant position in the personal computing operating-systems market to monopolize the word-processing and spreadsheet applications markets when it withdrew access to its namespace extensions (Novell, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, No. 12-4143, 10th Cir.).
PASADENA, Calif. - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 30 reinstated a class complaint accusing Wal-Mart Stores Inc. of falsely claiming that its battery recycling fee was required by California law (June Woolverton Johnson, et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 12-55233, 9th Cir.; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 22119).
OAKLAND, Calif. - Former and current student athletes may continue with their claim that the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) violated federal antitrust law by conspiring with Electronic Arts Inc. (EA) and Collegiate Licensing Co. (CLC) to restrain competition in the market for the commercial use of their names, images and likenesses in game footage, a federal judge in California ruled Oct. 25 in denying the NCAA's motion to dismiss (In Re NCAA Student-Athlete Name & Likeness Licensing Litigation, No. 09-1967, N.D. Calif.; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153730).