SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California on Sept. 11 granted in part and denied in part e-cigarette maker Juul Labs Inc.'s motion to dismiss an ex-employee's whistleblower complaint against it and to strike parts of her complaint, finding that while most of her allegations failed to state a claim, she presented an argument that Juul violated California law by offering her pay after termination if she waived her right to bring certain claims against the company (Marcie Hamilton v. Juul Labs Inc., No. 20-3710, N.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166718).
SAN DIEGO — A putative class complaint accusing a protein bar maker of falsely stating nutritional facts in violation of California's unfair competition law (UCL) and other state laws may proceed because the lead plaintiff alleged economic loss, a federal judge in California ruled Sept. 10, also rejecting the bar maker's allegation of preemption (Brittany Sebastian, et al. v. ONE Brands LLC, No. 20-9, S.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166518).
SANTA ANA, Calif. — A California appeals panel on Sept. 11 affirmed a lower court's dismissal of a homeowner's wrongful foreclosure lawsuit against a trustee, finding that the homeowner failed to show that the trustee engaged in an unlawful business practice by violating California's Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR) (Gavin Grant v. Clear Recon Corp., No. G057851, Calif. App., 4th Dist., Div. 3, 2020 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 5863).
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal magistrate judge in California on Sept. 8 granted in part and denied in part a manufacturer's motion to dismiss class action claims alleging that structural support products suffer from an inherent defect that was fraudulently concealed from California and Arizona homeowners, rejecting the manufacturer's contention that the complaint improperly alleged California Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) and unfair competition law (UCL) claims by out-of-state plaintiffs (Simon Nguyen, et al. v. Simpson Strong-Tie Company, Inc., et al., No. 19-07901, N.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164718).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — A California appeals panel on Sept. 11 affirmed a lower court's ruling in favor of Google LLC in a putative class action lawsuit alleging that Google's subscription data storage plan violated California's automatic renewal law, finding that the law's unconditional gift provision does not confer standing for a claim under California's unfair competition law (UCL) (Eric Mayron v. Google LLC, No. H044592, Calif. App., 6th Dist., 2020 Cal. App. LEXIS 864).
SANTA ANA, Calif. — A California appeals panel on Sept. 11 found that the proper measure of restitution is the time value of fees for the period when the class members paid loan modification fees and when the defendant could lawfully collect the fees, affirming a lower court's ruling in an unfair competition law (UCL) class action (Rene Marentes, et al. v. Impac Funding Corporation, No. G057616, Calif. App., 4th Dist., Div. 3, 2020 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 5865).
LOS ANGELES — A Los Angeles resident on Aug. 19 filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice of his class action complaint alleging in a California federal court that an insurance policy specifically covered his trip cancellation due to California’s civil authority orders in response to the novel coronavirus pandemic (Richard Robbins v. Generali Global Assistance, Inc., et al., No. 20-04904, C.D. Calif.).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A California appeals panel on Sept. 4 affirmed a lower court's dismissal of a plaintiff's wrongful foreclosure lawsuit, finding that the plaintiff failed to assert that the foreclosure was caused by the defendants' wrongful actions in violation of California's unfair competition law (Victoria O'Ferral v. SRP 2012-4, LLC, et al., No. E071762, Calif. App., 4th Dist., Div. 2, 2020 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 5786).
OAKLAND, Calif. — A federal judge in California on Sept. 3 denied a video game company's motion to dismiss a minor's claims for declaratory relief, negligent misrepresentation and violation of all three prongs of California's unfair competition law (UCL), finding that the plaintiff states a plausible claim that the company's alleged conduct of luring minors to spend a lot of money on in-App Fortnite purchases without their parents' consent is "immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, or substantially injurious to consumers" (C.W., et al. v. Epic Games, Inc., No. 19-03629, N.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162490).
SAN FRANCISCO — In an opinion and separate memorandum disposition both issued Aug. 20, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals partly upheld a grant of summary judgment in favor of Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. (HPE), accused of copyright infringement and unfair competition in connection with its software patch and technical support for Oracle America Inc.'s "Solaris" software (Oracle America Inc. v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, No. 19-15506, 9th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26457, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26508).
SAN FRANCISCO — A man who used Google LLC's AdWords program sufficiently established standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution for his false advertising and unfair competition claims based on Google's purported misrepresentations about accounting for "click fraud," a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Sept. 1, reversing and remanding a trial court's dismissal of his putative class complaint (Gurminder Singh v. Google LLC, No. 18-17035, 9th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 27834).
LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in California on Aug. 28 denied a restaurant insured's motion to remand and granted an all-risk insurer's motion to dismiss the insured's lawsuit seeking coverage for its losses arising from the governmental shutdown orders prompted by the novel coronavirus, finding that the insured failed to demonstrated that it incurred "direct physical loss of or damage to property" to trigger the policy's civil authority coverage (10E, LLC v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of Connecticut, et al., No. 20-0441, C.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156827).
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California on Aug. 28 granted Facebook Inc.'s motion to dismiss an advertising company's putative class action alleging that the "world's largest social media services company" violated California's unfair competition law (UCL) by making numerous false or misleading statements about advertising on its social media platform, finding that the plaintiff failed to assert facts establishing that it has statutory standing to sue under the UCL (dotStrategy Co. v. Facebook Inc., No. 20-00170, N.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156903).
WILMINGTON, Del. — A federal magistrate judge in Delaware on Aug. 28 recommended denying defendants' motion to dismiss a plaintiff's California unfair competition law (UCL) claim, finding that the plaintiff has asserted a plausible trade dress infringement theory in support of its UCL claim (Truinject Corp. v. Galderma, S.A., et al., No. 19-592-LPS-JLH, D. Del., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156255).
LOS ANGELES — A California judge on Aug. 14 approved a settlement of a lawsuit brought by the state of California under the state's unfair competition law (UCL) against the operators of The Weather Channel app for sharing users' geolocation data with third-party advertisers (California v. TWC Product and Technology LLC, et al., No. 19STCV00605, Calif. Super. Los Angeles Co.).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Almost a year after ruling that an insured failed to demonstrate any economic loss from entering into a reinsurance participation agreement (RPA) and, thus, lacked standing to sue under the California unfair competition law (UCL), a federal judge in California on Aug. 25 awarded costs of $20,396.04 against the insured (Pet Food Express Ltd. v. Applied Underwriters Inc., et al., No. 16-1211, E.D. Calif.).
SAN DIEGO — Permitting a fifth amended complaint in a California class action pursuing unfair competition law (UCL) and other consumer protection law claims against two companies for allegedly marketing consumer talc products as safe despite knowing their dangers will not cause undue delay or prejudice, a federal judge in the state said Aug. 20 in granting the motion (Louisa Gutierrez, et al. v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., et al., No. 19-1345, S.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151296).
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California on Aug. 19 dismissed a woman's claims accusing her servicer of violating the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the California unfair competition law (UCL) when charging payment processing fees for mortgage payments made over the phone and struck her class allegations after finding that the class requirements in the complaint could not be met (Amye Elbert v. RoundPoint Mortgage Servicing Corp., No. 20-250, N.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150341).
SAN DIEGO — A federal judge in California on Aug. 14 denied a motion by a hotel franchisor and operator to dismiss a putative class complaint accusing it of violating California's unfair competition law (UCL) and other state statutes by falsely advertising room rates and hiding certain fees in initial quotes, finding sufficient evidence for the claims to proceed (Todd Hall v. Marriott International, Inc., No. 19-1715, S.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148467).
SAN FRANCISCO — Emails and posts on an internal online platform by two former male employees are relevant to disparate treatment and impact claims brought against Google LLC by former female employees under California's unfair competition law (UCL), a California judge found Aug. 18, ordering the technology giant to produce the requested electronically stored information (ESI) (Kelly Ellis, et al v. Google LLC, No. CGC-17-561299, Calif. Super., San Francisco Co.).