Newsletter RSS

Mealey's California Section 17200

  • February 27, 2026

    Judge Gives Reasons For Juul Antitrust Class Ruling, Allows Reconsideration

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge on Feb. 26 issued a ruling providing the reasoning behind a previously issued short-form order certifying several classes of purchasers bringing antitrust claims against Juul Labs Inc. (JLI) and Altria Group Inc. for allegedly seeking to monopolize the e-cigarette market, and also granted a defense motion for reconsideration as to time limits on the class.

  • February 27, 2026

    Judge Dismisses xAI’s Employee Poaching, Trade Secrets Claims Against OpenAI

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge granted OpenAI Inc.’s motion to dismiss an amended complaint in which xAI accused competitor OpenAI of violating the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) and California’s unfair competition law (UCL), writing that xAI’s allegations relate to the conduct of eight former employees who left for OpenAI but not “any misconduct by OpenAI.”

  • February 24, 2026

    Employers To Pay $1.7M In Attorney Fees Over Invasive Application Questions

    SAN DIEGO — A California federal judge granted final approval to a settlement of $1 per class member, amounting to approximately $172,000, and granted a motion for attorney fees of $1,775,000 to the plaintiffs’ attorneys to resolve class action claims against multiple employers for requiring job applicants to answer invasive medical inquiries, including when one plaintiff’s last menstrual period was, in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and California’s unfair competition law (UCL).

  • February 23, 2026

    Changes To Hong Kong Tribunal Tainted $5.7M Attorney Fee Award, Court Told

    LOS ANGELES — A Dutch company based in California and two California citizens on Feb. 20 filed a motion in California federal court for reconsideration of an order confirming a Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) award against them worth more than $5.7 million, mostly comprising attorney fees in addition to arbitration costs, writing that the arbitration was flawed due to a new law that forced two of their counsel to resign and rendered HKIAC “incapable of impartial administration.”

  • February 20, 2026

    23andMe Data Breach MDL Dismissed After Settlements Approved In Bankruptcy Court

    The California federal judge overseeing multidistrict litigation against 23andMe Inc. and affiliates for a data breach in which millions of customers’ genetic data and personally identifiable information (PII) was hacked entered an order dismissing the MDL, following the final approval in Missouri federal bankruptcy court of a settlement worth up to $50 million to resolve U.S. customers’ claims against 23andMe and the final approval of a  $3.25 million settlement for Canadian class members.

  • February 19, 2026

    Former NPR Host Accuses Google Of Stealing His Voice For Use In AI

    SAN JOSE, Calif. — Google LLC and Alphabet Inc. stole National Public Radio host David Greene’s voice without authorization and used it as the default voice in NotebookLM, its artificial intelligence broadcasting product, the award-winning journalist claims in a California state court lawsuit alleging violation of the California unfair competition law, a pair of privacy laws and unjust enrichment.

  • February 19, 2026

    StubHub Largely Granted Summary Judgment In Consumers’ Pandemic Cancellation Case

    OAKLAND, Calif. — A federal judge in California granted StubHub Inc.’s summary judgment motion as to the three remaining California law claims brought by a putative class of consumers seeking injunctive relief or restitution related to the company’s refund policy changes implemented for events canceled or rescheduled due to the coronavirus pandemic; the judge deferred ruling on claims in the multidistrict litigation seeking monetary damages to allow the parties to file briefs about why the claims should or shouldn’t be compelled to arbitration.

  • February 19, 2026

    2nd Circuit Rejects Objections To New York Times Auto-Renewal Settlement

    NEW YORK — The Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a trial court’s approval of a $2,375,000 settlement to be paid by The New York Times Co. to end a class complaint accusing the newspaper publisher of engaging in an illegal “automatic renewal” scheme over objections by a California attorney who has both litigated class actions and participated in a number of class actions as an objector.

  • February 19, 2026

    4th Circuit: Class Lacks Predominance, Superiority But May Still Be Certified

    RICHMOND, Va. — Noting the case is “unusual,” a split Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel partially vacated a trial court’s decision to strike class claims in a mortgage discrimination case, finding that while certification could be denied “based solely on the face of the complaint” under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) due to a failure to show predominance and/or superiority, it would be premature to deny certification under Rule 23(b)(2).

  • February 17, 2026

    Suit Against Milk Sellers Over ‘Sustainability’ Claims Partly Dismissed By Judge

    LOS ANGELES — A California federal judge on Feb. 13 largely granted motions to dismiss a putative class case against milk sellers and producers for allegedly falsely advertising their products as sustainable and environmentally friendly in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL), finding their specific misrepresentation claims too vague but allowing their claims that they were deceived by a milk logo with a happy cartoon cow to proceed.

  • February 17, 2026

    Equitable Jurisdiction Remand In Consumer Deception Case May Head To High Court

    SAN DIEGO — On remand from the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which opined that federal courts can remand consumer protection cases to state court for lack of equitable jurisdiction only after giving defendants an opportunity to keep the case in federal court, a California federal judge granted a joint motion to stay a putative class action lawsuit against an online collectibles seller pending the plaintiff’s filing of a petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court.

  • February 12, 2026

    Federal Judge Remands Rolling Paper Trademark Case To California State Court

    LOS ANGELES — A California judge remanded a tobacco company’s trademark complaint against entities it said sold counterfeit products to California state court, agreeing with the plaintiff entity that its claims did not sound in federal trademark law, only state and common law.

  • February 11, 2026

    Crocs Tells 9th Circuit Dismissal Of Heat-Shrinking Defect Suit Was Proper

    SAN FRANCISCO — Crocs Inc. filed an appellee brief in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals urging affirmance of a federal judge’s grant of summary judgment on putative class claims against it for allegedly misrepresenting its shoes as weather resistant in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL), arguing that the alleged incidents of Crocs shrinking after heat exposure are “extremely rare.”

  • February 10, 2026

    Judge Dismisses Class Allegations In Suit Against California Fair Plan Association

    LOS ANGELES — Noting that good cause has been shown, a California judge granted an insured’s motion to dismiss without prejudice class allegations in the insured’s lawsuit alleging that the California Fair Plan Association (CFP) issued property insurance policies with fire coverage that is unlawfully restrictive as to smoke damage claims.

  • February 06, 2026

    Judge Certifies Classes In Juul Antitrust Suit, Denies Opposing Daubert Motions

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge on Feb. 5 entered a short form order announcing his rulings certifying several classes of purchasers bringing antitrust claims against Juul Labs Inc. (JLI) and Altria Group Inc. for allegedly seeking to monopolize the e-cigarette market and increasing prices after Altria in 2018 invested in JLI and denied the opposing parties’ Daubert motions to exclude each other’s experts.

  • February 06, 2026

    Judge Tosses Surfboard Company’s Trademark Claims For Lack Of License Termination

    SAN DIEGO — A California federal judge found that an entity associated with a world-famous surfer failed to show that it terminated a license agreement that allowed a surfboard manufacturer the ability to use trademarks associated with the surfer’s name, sinking the plaintiff’s claims of infringement and unfair competition.

  • February 05, 2026

    ‘Japanese’ Alcohol Brand Will Remove Deceptive Labels In Class Action Settlement

    SAN FRANCISCO — A consumer representing a certified statewide class in a lawsuit against a California company for deceptively marketing the origin of Japanese-style sake that is manufactured domestically filed a motion in California federal court for preliminary approval of a settlement under which the company will remove the allegedly deceptive origin labels from its products and pay the plaintiffs attorney fees of $645,000.

  • February 05, 2026

    Costco Hit With Class Suit Over ‘No Preservatives’ Promises On Rotisserie Chicken

    SAN DIEGO — Costco Wholesale Corp. advertises its signature rotisserie chicken as containing “no preservatives” even though the popular members-only store item contains sodium phosphate and carrageenan, two consumers allege in a putative class complaint filed in a federal court in California.

  • February 04, 2026

    Judge Denies Google Users’ Bid For $2.36B, Won’t Decertify Data-Gathering Classes

    SAN FRANCISCO — Following a California federal jury’s award of $425 million to two classes of mobile device users against Google LLC for tracking their online activity after telling them that it would not, a judge denied a posttrial motion by the plaintiffs for a permanent injunction and disgorgement of $2.36 billion of Google’s profits allegedly from “misconduct” and denied a motion by Google to decertify the plaintiffs’ classes.

  • February 03, 2026

    Judge Approves $3M Settlement Of Consumers’, Employees’ Data Breach Claims

    SEATTLE — A federal judge in Washington granted final approval to a settlement worth $3 million, including $1 million in attorney fees, in favor of a class of more than 34,000 individuals who alleged that their sensitive data was breached during a hack of a workflow solutions company and its subsidiaries in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other laws.

  • February 03, 2026

    23andMe Bankruptcy Judge Approves $50M Settlement; Data Breach MDL To Be Dismissed

    The parties to multidistrict litigation in California federal court against 23andMe Inc. and affiliates for a data breach in which millions of customers’ genetic data and personally identifiable information (PII) was hacked filed a joint status report on Feb. 2 stating the plaintiffs will move to dismiss the MDL following the final approval in Missouri federal bankruptcy court of a settlement worth up to $50 million to resolve U.S. customers’ claims against 23andMe, with 25% allocated for attorney fees.

  • February 03, 2026

    Roblox Players’ Parents Seek Quick Affirmance Of Arbitration Dispute

    SAN FRANCISCO — The parents of minor users of Roblox Corp.’s gaming platform asked the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to summarily affirm a California federal judge’s denial of a motion to compel arbitration or dismiss brought by the developer of the now-defunct “Bloxflip” third-party game where children could allegedly gamble with their digital “Robux,” arguing that the developer never presented evidence that players saw his arbitration agreement.

  • February 03, 2026

    Google Assistant Users Seek Approval Of $68M Settlement For Eavesdropping Claims

    SAN JOSE, Calif. — A California federal judge terminated a hearing date after a group of plaintiffs moved for preliminary approval of a $68 million settlement of their putative class claims against Google LLC and Alphabet Inc. (collectively Google) for allegedly eavesdropping on Google Assistant (GA) users in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and privacy laws.

  • February 03, 2026

    Women’s Dating Advice App Seeks To Dismiss ‘Hyperbolic’ Data Hack Complaint

    SAN FRANCISCO — The developer of the “Tea” women’s app for posting information about men in the dating market moved in California federal court to dismiss putative class claims against it for violation of federal privacy laws and state laws including California’s unfair competition law (UCL) after its database of users’ identity-verification and driver’s license photos was hacked, writing that the plaintiffs suffered no injury and fail to state a claim.

  • February 02, 2026

    Plaintiff’s Counsel Seek Stay Of $623K Attorney Fee Sanction Pending Mandamus Writ

    LOS ANGELES — A plaintiff’s attorneys facing a $623,000 attorney fee sanction on Jan. 30 filed a motion in California federal court to stay the sanction against them pending the outcome of their petition for a writ of mandamus before the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, writing that the sanction for allegedly bringing a frivolous suit against Walmart Inc. by misrepresenting how the plaintiff purchased Walmart’s store-brand avocado oil is “erroneous.”