SAN DIEGO — A California federal judge on Oct. 16 granted a consumer’s request for class certification of a case, in which a consumer alleges that a restaurant violated California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other California laws by adding a surcharge to its bills, holding that a class action was the superior method for adjudicating the dispute (Kathleen Holt v. Noble House Hotels & Resorts Ltd., No. 17-cv-2246, S.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145566).
SAN FRANCISCO — Logitech Inc. filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 9 requesting that it be allowed to settle a false advertising class lawsuit with consumers (In re Logitech Inc. v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco, No. 18-72732, 9th Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A purchaser who alleges that he relied on false statements about heart-health when purchasing a supplement on Oct. 12 waived his right to respond to a vitamin maker’s petition for a writ of certiorari, seeking review of an appeals court ruling that reversed denial of class certification of the purchaser’s claims for violations of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) (Pharmavite LLC v. Noah Bradach, No. 18-449, U.S. Sup., 2018 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 3694).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 15 denied a petition for writ of certiorari filed by companies who sought review of a California high court’s decision that a district attorney’s state law claims for violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and False Advertising Law (FAL) in relation to an explosion that killed two people were not preempted by federal occupational safety and health law (Emerson Electric Co., et al. v. Superior Court of California, Orange County, et al., No. 17-1713, U.S. Sup.).
SANTA ANA, Calif. — A patient at an emergency medical care facility on Oct. 9 filed a class action against its owner in a California court, asserting that the owner’s billing practices violate California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) (Joshua Yebba v. AHMC Healthcare Inc., No. 2018-01024090, Calif. Super., Orange Co.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — The same day that Google Inc. announced that a data leak had compromised the personally identifiable information (PII) of up to 500,000 users of its Google Plus social network, the technology giant was named in a putative class complaint filed in California federal court Oct. 8, accusing it of unfair competition, invasion of privacy and negligence (Matt Matic, et al. v. Google Inc., et al., No. 5:18-cv-06164, N.D. Calif.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — A California federal judge on Oct. 9 granted a motion to dismiss a consumer’s claims for violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other causes of action against Google North America Inc. in relation to its mobile phone and data services, holding that he failed to plead his claims with the required particularity because he did not allege that he actually relied on misrepresentations made by Google (Gordon Beecher v. Google North America Inc., No. 18-cv-00753, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173805).
LOS ANGELES — Johnson & Johnson falsely and unfairly advertised its baby powder and Shower to Shower products as symbols of freshness, cleanliness and purity — and above all safe for everyday use — despite evidence of a talc-ovarian cancer link that began mounting in 1971, a woman claims in a California unfair competition law (UCL) action filed Oct. 8 (Evelyn Hampton v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., No. 18-08618, C.D. Calif.).
LOS ANGELES — A consumer who alleges that a defective blender exploded, causing her serious injuries, on Oct. 5 sued the maker of the blender and others in a federal court, asserting claims for negligence, violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other claims (Naccole Guinn v. NutriBullet, LLC, et al., No. 2:18cv8613, C.D. Calif.).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A California federal judge on Oct. 5 granted a motion filed by lenders to dismiss claims for violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other California law claims, holding that the third case filed by the same borrowers in relation to their mortgage was barred by res judicata (Rajesh Varma, et al. v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC, et al., No. 18-1038, C.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172779).
PASADENA, Calif. — After holding that a consumer sufficiently alleged that she relied on misrepresentations about trans-fat content on a label in making the decision to purchase the product and other holdings, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 4 reversed a ruling dismissing her claims against a grocery store company for violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other California law claims (Shavonda Hawkins v. The Kroger Co., No. 16-55532, 9th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 28116).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California federal judge on Sept. 26 partially granted a motion filed by lenders to dismiss claims for negligence, violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other causes of action but allowed a borrower’s claim for violation of California’s Homeowner’s Bill Of Rights (HBOR) to proceed, holding that she submitted sufficient evidence to possibly show that the defendants failed to meet their statutory obligations under the HBOR when they did not exercise due diligence in contacting her about her default (Chanell S. Watkins v. Ditech Financial LLC, et al., No. 2:17-cv-02247, E.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165718).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — A California federal judge on Oct. 2 refused to dismiss claims for violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other state law claims asserted by an employee of a paper company, but held that she failed to plead claims related to the care and cost of her uniform with the required particularity (Elisa Arroyo v. International Paper Co., No. 17-cv-06211, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170385).
LOS ANGELES — A customer on Sept. 28 sued McDonald’s USA LLC in a California state court, asserting that it misrepresented the price and nature of its value meals in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other state laws (Paul Bledsoe v. McDonalds USA LLC, No. BC720960, Calif. Super., Los Angeles Co.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — A California federal judge on Oct. 1 dismissed in part a consumer class complaint alleging that Apple Inc. intentionally slowed the performance of certain iPhone and iPad models in connection with an operating system update, finding that the plaintiffs did not sufficiently allege some of their computer fraud, consumer fraud and unfair competition claims (In re: Apple Inc. Device Performance Litigation, No. 5:18-md-02827, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169606).
LOS ANGELES — A California appeals court on Oct. 1 affirmed a trial court’s award of damages related to a partnership for the formation of a trucking company, holding that the party responsible for the business’s accounting failed to submit any evidence on how the ruling granting judgment on claims for breach of contract, violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other causes of action asserted against him was not supported (Ararat Yousefi v. Aris Nazarian, No. B271655, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 4, 2018 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 6711).
LOS ANGELES — In a Sept. 25 suit alleging violation of the California unfair competition (UCL) and false advertising law (FAL), a woman suffering from ovarian cancer claims consumer talc company Johnson & Johnson continued selling the product despite decades of evidence detailing its risks and the existence of viable alternatives (Robin Huey v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., No. 18-2056, C.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO — Ticketmaster LLC and Live Nation Entertainment Inc. (collectively, Ticketmaster) have failed to eliminate the scalping of tickets because they have actually helped the sale of tickets to the secondary market in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and common law of unjust enrichment, a California man alleges in his Sept. 28 class complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Allen Lee, et al. v. Ticketmaster L.L.C., et al., No. 18-5987, N.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO — The same day that Facebook Inc. announced a data breach affecting almost 50 million of its users’ accounts, two of the social network’s account holders on Sept. 28 filed a putative class action against it for unfair competition, negligence and deceit in California federal court (Carl Echavarria, et al. v. Facebook Inc., No. 3:18-cv-05982, N.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO — California cannot obtain injunctive relief under its unfair competition law (UCL) claim against a member of an Indian tribe for selling untaxed cigarettes from her reservation home, but the woman can be enjoined from selling cigarettes in violation of the state’s cigarette fire safety and Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) directory laws, a state appeals panel held Sept. 25 (The People ex rel. Xavier Becerra v. Ardith Huber, No. A144214, Calif. App., 1st Dist., 4th Div., 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 855).