PASADENA, Calif. - After finding that a claimant's claims for violation of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), fraud and other claims lacked particularity or were time-barred, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Dec. 12 affirmed dismissal of the case (Olasumbo Titilola Ajetunmobi v. Clarion Mortgage Capital Inc., et al., No. 12-56523, 9th Cir.; 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 23397).
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge in California on Dec. 12 dismissed a case alleging that the transfer of a deed of trust and promissory note securing a mortgage were improperly securitized, saying that the plaintiff's theories do not support any of her claims, including one brought under the state's unfair competition law (UCL) (Carolanne Sottile v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, et al., No. 13-5909, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172277).
OAKLAND, Calif. - At the close of the named plaintiffs' case in an antitrust class action trial related to its iPod and iTunes products, Apple Inc. on Dec. 10 filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL), arguing that allowing the unsupported claims to proceed to a jury runs counter to existing antitrust case law (The Apple iPod iTunes Antitrust Litigation, No. 4:05-cv-00037, N.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO - In separate suits, the district attorneys for the City and County of San Francisco and the County of Los Angeles on Dec. 9 sued two prearranged car transportation services, also known as ride-sharing services, in state court for violating the state's unfair competition law (UCL) by allegedly misleading consumers over how they screen drivers and ensure the customer's safety. Defendant Lyft Inc. entered into a stipulated judgment and permanent injunction the same day under which it will pay $500,000 to settle its claims (The People of the State of California v. Uber Technologies Corp., et al., No. 14-543120, The People of the State of California v. Lyft Inc., No. 14-543113, Calif. Super. San Francisco Co.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A federal judge in California on Dec. 8 granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant in a class action lawsuit asserting an unfair competition law (UCL) claim over the alleged mislabeling of "all natural" packaged fruit products, saying insufficient evidence existed showing that reasonable consumers would be misled by the labeling (Chad Brazil v. Dole Packaged Foods, No. 12-1831, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169948).
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge in California on Dec. 3 denied class certification in a case alleging that a juice maker violated the state's unfair competition law (UCL) by placing a false and misleading "No Sugar Added" statement on its 100 percent apple juice product and also denied the defendant's motion to reconsider a previous summary judgment ruling finding that the plaintiff established sufficient evidence to establish "actual damages" under the UCL (Mohammed Rahman v. Mott's LLP, No. 13-3482, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167744).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A federal judge in California on Nov. 25 granted the defendants' separate motions to dismiss a putative class action complaint that contained state unfair competition law (UCL) claims accusing the owners of a retirement community of mismanaging entrance and monthly fees (Burton Richter, et al. v. CC-Palo Alto Inc., et al., No. 14-750, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165078).
NEW YORK - The federal judge overseeing the General Motors LLC ignition switch litigation ruled Nov. 24 that a suit brought by Orange County, Calif., District Attorney Tony Rackauckas on behalf of California owners of GM-manufactured vehicles belongs in the California state court where it was originally filed (In re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, No. 14-md-02543-JMF, People of the State of California v. General Motors LLC, No. 1:14-cv-07787-JMF, S.D. N.Y.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge in California on Nov. 20 declined to dismiss a suit accusing a financial institution of violating the state's unfair competition law (UCL) by failing to accept timely mortgage payments, saying the plaintiff supported all his claims (Fernando Morales v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC, No. 14-3081, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162961).
NEW YORK - On Nov. 21, a New York federal judge granted final approval to a $400 settlement between Apple Inc. and a group of consumer and state plaintiffs to settle claims that it conspired with publishers to fix prices of electronic books (e-books) (In re Electronic Books Antitrust Litigation, No. 1:11-md-02293, S.D. N.Y. [State of Texas, et al. v. Penguin Group (USA) Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-03394, S.D. N.Y.]).
BATON ROUGE, La. - Blue Cross Blue Shield of Louisiana on Nov. 17 filed a class action complaint in federal court, alleging that Endo Health Solutions Inc. paid a competitor at least $112 million to delay a generic drug until Endo could market a new, crush-resistant formula (Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Company, et al. v. Endo Health Solutions, Inc., et al., No. 14-721, M.D. La.).
FRESNO, Calif. - A federal judge in California on Nov. 12 partially granted the defendant's motion to dismiss a case related to a mortgage foreclosure, dismissing a state unfair competition law (UCL) claim with leave to amend (Anthony Moreno, et al. v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, et al., No. 14-1024, E.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159349).
OAKLAND, Calif. - A federal judge in California on Nov. 12 partially granted and partially denied plaintiffs' motion to certify eight putative classes in a wage and labor dispute. Among the classes denied was a state unfair competition law class, which was denied as being redundant to the class and subclasses certified (Charles Brewer, et al. v. General Nutrition Corp., No. 11-3587, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159380).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - On Nov. 13, a California federal judge again ruled that putative class claims for unfair competition under state law and common-law publicity rights may proceed against LinkedIn Corp., rejecting the social network operator's defenses under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the Communications Decency Act (CDA) (Paul Perkins, et al. v. LinkedIn Corp., No. 13-cv-04303, N.D. Calif.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A federal judge in California on Nov. 10 partially dismissed a putative class action case accusing Apple Inc. of unlawfully marketing its text-messaging service by not telling consumers that the service prevents former iPhone users from receiving certain text messages after they replaced their iPhones with non-Apple devices, leaving a claim brought under the state's unfair competition law (UCL) predicated on a tortious interference with business contract claim but dismissing a UCL claim predicated on a Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) claim (Adrienne Moore v. Apple Inc., No. 14-2269, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158900).
PASADENA, Calif. - The State of California may proceed with claims against the maker of a gender prediction test under the state's unfair competition and false advertising laws but may not proceed with restitution claims that seek relief for those alleged violations on behalf of members of a class who already settled claims with the company, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Nov. 7 (The People of the State of California v. IntelliGender, LLC, No. 13-56806, 9th Cir.; 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21312).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A California federal magistrate on Nov. 7 found that three defendant software support firms adequately alleged their antitrust counterclaims against Oracle America Inc. in a dispute centering on the Solaris operating system, denying in part the software giant's motion to dismiss (Oracle America Inc. v. Terix Computer Company Inc., et al., No. 5:13-cv-03385, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158060).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. - A federal judge in California on Nov. 6 dismissed without leave to amend a mortgage foreclosure case that included a state unfair competition law (UCL) claim, saying that all the claims were time-barred and that had the plaintiffs undertaken a reasonable investigation, they would have had sufficient information to state their claims before the limitations period ran out (Gaylen Herfurth, et al. v. CitiMortgage Inc., et al., No. 14-1037, E.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157287).
LOS ANGELES - A federal judge in California left standing several claims, including a state unfair competition law (UCL) claim in class action for wrongful seizure of property and personal belongings (Victoria Urenia, et al. v. Public Storage, et al., No. 13-1934, C.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158110).
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal magistrate judge in California on Nov. 6 dismissed with leave to amend a class action complaint alleging that the distributers of a supplement to boost human growth hormone violated the state's unfair competition law (UCL) claim, saying no private right of action existed for the plaintiff's substantiation claim (Julian Engel v. Novex Biotech LLC, et al., No. 14-3457, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157281).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A federal judge in California on Nov. 6 held that an injunction class will continue in an unfair competition law (UCL) case over the alleged mislabeling of "all natural" packaged fruit products but decertified a damages class (Chad Brazil v. Dole Packaged Foods LLC, No. 12-1831, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157575).
LOS ANGELES - A class action alleging that American Honda Motor Co. and air bag manufacturer Takata Corp. failed to timely disclose defects in air bags that caused them to explode upon impact was filed Nov. 4 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Luke Hooper, et al. v. American Honda Motor Co. Inc., No. 2:14-08565, C.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge on Oct. 31 dismissed a putative unfair competition class action against maker of PC-cleaning software, finding that the lead plaintiff failed to sufficiently plead the purportedly "false or misleading" representations upon which he relied (Jack Davis v. Apperience Corp., et al., No. 3:14-cv-00766, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154758).
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge in California on Oct. 30 dismissed a putative class action complaint alleging violation of the state's unfair competition law (UCL) over the labeling of a human growth hormone supplement, saying the plaintiff alleged a substantiation claim, for which there is no private right of action, instead of a false advertising claim. The judge added that the plaintiff could amend her complaint to assert the correct cause of action (Serena Kwan v. SanMedica International, No. 14-3287, N.D. Calif.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154051).
PHILADELPHIA - Plaintiffs in the antitrust lawsuit that made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court and accuses Comcast Corp. of conspiring with other cable companies to remain the exclusive provider in certain areas moved Oct. 28 for certification of a settlement class and preliminary approval of a $50 million settlement (Stanford Glaberson, et al. v. Comcast Corporation, et al., No. 03-6604, E.D. Pa.).