Newsletter RSS

Mealey's California Section 17200

  • April 17, 2026

    Magistrate Judge Says California Vape Seller Violated Laws But Penalties Uncertain

    FRESNO, Calif. — A California federal magistrate judge recommended granting the California Attorney General’s Office’s motion for summary judgment against a flavored-vape retailer and its CEO for violating federal and state tobacco laws and California’s unfair competition law (UCL) by selling disposable flavored vape products without a license or youth restrictions but denying a request for more than $1 million in civil penalties due to a factual dispute about the amount owed.

  • April 17, 2026

    Class Action Over Overheating Audio Players For Kids Dismissed With Prejudice

    NEW YORK — A New York federal judge on April 16 granted a motion to dismiss with prejudice a putative class action accusing the maker of portable audio players for children of violating California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other laws by concealing a defect that would cause the devices’ batteries to overheat, noting that the company voluntarily recalled and replaced customers’ batteries.

  • April 17, 2026

    Brita Filters’ Vulnerability To PFAS Not ‘Unreasonable,’ 9th Circuit Says

    PASADENA, Calif. — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on April 16 affirmed the dismissal of a putative class action against a water filter maker for allegedly misrepresenting their filter’s ability to purify water when it cannot remove per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), writing that “reasonable” consumers would not expect this ability and that the company was not required to disclose this as an “unreasonable safety hazard.”

  • April 17, 2026

    Judge Vacates Deadlines After Pet Food Maker, Consumer Reach Settlement

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California federal judge vacated all pending deadlines in a putative class action against a pet food company for allegedly falsely labeling its pet food products as containing no preservatives in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) after the parties filed a joint notice that they had reached a confidential settlement and that the plaintiff would dismiss her claims, approximately one month after the court granted in part and denied in part a defense motion to dismiss.

  • April 16, 2026

    ‘Robux’ Gambling Game Developer Says Kids Bound By Arbitration Agreement

    SAN FRANCISCO — The developer of “Bloxflip,” a website that allegedly allowed minors to gamble using “Robux” digital currency their parents had bought for them to use on Roblox Corp.’s gaming platform, filed an appellant brief to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals arguing that a federal judge improperly denied his motion to compel arbitration of parents’ claims against him for violating California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other laws.

  • April 16, 2026

    Soda Company’s $8.9M Settlement For ‘Prebiotic’ Claims Gets Final OK

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge granted final approval to an $8.9 million settlement resolving claims brought against the manufacturer of a soda product for violating California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other laws by deceptively labeling its soda as “Prebiotic” and “gut healthy,” but withheld implementation of the settlement pending a final decision on attorney fees.

  • April 16, 2026

    Sanctioned Attorneys Were Reckless, Not Mistaken, Walmart Tells 9th Circuit

    SAN FRANCISCO — Walmart Inc. urges the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to uphold a $623,000 attorney fee sanction against two attorneys in its answer to their petition for a writ of mandamus challenging the sanctions, writing that the lawyers “recklessly” used a false allegation to pursue months of litigation against Walmart for allegedly mislabeling its avocado oil.

  • April 16, 2026

    Colorado River Doesn’t Require Abstention In OpenAI Murder-Suicide Case

    SAN FRANCISCO — A federal suit involving California unfair competition law (UCL), negligence and wrongful death claims against OpenAI entities after a murder-suicide will proceed after a federal judge in California concluded that a similar state court suit does not involve the type of parallel litigation required for abstention.

  • April 16, 2026

    Attorney Fee Distribution Upheld After Anticompetitive Tying Class Settlement

    SAN FRANCISCO — The court-appointed lead class counsel in a more than decade-long lawsuit accusing Sutter Health of monopolizing northern California hospital markets to raise prices and decrease competition had the authority to allocate attorney fees to multiple firms following a $228.5 million settlement approved in November and did so in a “reasonable and fair” manner, a federal magistrate judge in California ruled, denying a motion by one of the firms to enforce the order awarding fees.

  • April 15, 2026

    Plaintiffs’ Amend PFAS Smartwatch Case Against Apple, Adding Proposed Subclasses

    SAN FRANCISCO — A putative class has filed a second amended complaint in California federal court against Apple Inc., alleging that its smartwatch bands contain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), adding proposed subclasses and striking some claims.

  • April 15, 2026

    Judge Dismisses Benzene Suit For Failure To State A Claim But Grants Leave To Amend

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge will allow a woman one more chance to amend her putative class complaint alleging that companies violated various California consumer protection laws by manufacturing and selling products containing benzene.

  • April 15, 2026

    Preliminary Injunction Granted In Trade Secrets Case Between 2 AI Data Platforms

    SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California granted a preliminary injunction in a trade secrets misappropriation case involving two companies that provide data labeling and other services to artificial intelligence (AI) companies and enjoined the defendants from using, disclosing or destroying any confidential information and data allegedly obtained from the plaintiff when it interviewed and eventually hired one of its employees.

  • April 14, 2026

    Tesla Driver Defends Class Certification Based On Unfair ‘Self-Driving’ Claims

    SAN FRANCISCO — The representative of a putative class of drivers suing Tesla Inc. and its affiliates on April 13 filed a brief urging the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to affirm the certification of a class action against Tesla for unfairly marketing cars as having “self-driving” technology in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL), asserting that the evidence supported “an inference of class exposure and materiality to a reasonable consumer.”

  • April 09, 2026

    Panel Partly Reverses Verdict In Mortuary’s Favor After Wrong Body Sent To Family

    SAN DIEGO — A California appellate panel on April 9 partly reversed a jury’s verdict in favor of a California mortuary accused of breach of contract and violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) after it returned the wrong body to a grieving family while the body of their loved one was accidentally cremated in Texas, remanding part of the mortuary’s defense for a new bench trial.

  • April 09, 2026

    Plaintiffs Appeal Dismissal Of ‘Greenwashing’ Suit Against E-Cig Makers

    SAN FRANCISCO — E-cigarette consumers whose putative class lawsuit in California federal court against e-cigarette companies for “greenwashing” their products by calling them “carbon-neutral” in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other laws was dismissed after the judge found that the defendants’ environmental claims were legally proper are appealing that ruling to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

  • April 08, 2026

    Magistrate Allows 2 Claims To Proceed In Rainstorm Coverage Suit

    OAKLAND, Calif. — A federal magistrate judge in California denied an insurer and claims administrator’s motion to dismiss an insured’s breach of contract and bad faith claims in her lawsuit seeking flood coverage for damage to her San Anselmo, Calif., home caused by a rainstorm, but granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the insured’s claims for unfair competition, intentional misrepresentation, punitive damages, restitution, disgorgement and injunctive relief.

  • April 08, 2026

    9th Circuit Says Homeowners Lack Standing To Sue Anchor Maker, Affirms Sanctions

    SAN FRANCISCO — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel vacated a judgment on the pleadings in favor of two companies accused in a long-running putative class suit of selling homeowners defective anchors and said the case should have been dismissed for lack of standing.  The panel split in affirming $85,000 in attorney fees as sanction against the plaintiffs for filing a “baseless” complaint.

  • April 07, 2026

    Epic Seeks Reconsideration Of Order Staying Mandate In Antitrust Row With Apple

    SAN FRANCISCO — Epic Games Inc. on April 6 filed a motion for reconsideration of a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals order issued the same day granting a motion by Apple Inc. to stay its mandate affirming a lower court judgment finding Apple in contempt of a court-ordered injunction enjoining Apple from certain anticompetitive practices on its App Store in an antitrust dispute with Epic.

  • April 06, 2026

    Stanley Tumbler Buyers Fail To Show Lead Causes ‘Material’ Harm, Judge Says

    SEATTLE — A Washington federal judge on April 3 granted a motion filed by the manufacturer of Stanley-brand tumblers to dismiss an amended putative class action lawsuit against it for violating several states’ consumer protection laws, including California’s unfair competition law (UCL), by failing to disclose the presence of lead in its products, writing that the plaintiffs failed to allege that the use of lead to insulate the tumblers would harm consumers.

  • April 02, 2026

    Protective Order Sought In Epstein Privacy Violation Suit Against Google, DOJ

    SAN JOSE, Calif. — An alleged victim of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein filed a motion in California federal court seeking a protective order to proceed under a pseudonym in her putative class suit alleging that U.S. Department of Justice violated the Privacy Act by wrongfully disclosing her personally identifiable information and that of other victims of Epstein when releasing files pursuant to the Epstein Files Transparency Act and that Google LLC continues to republish that information.

  • April 02, 2026

    Judge Reduces Attorney Fee Award, Approves Settlement In Google Data Sharing Row

    OAKLAND, Calif. — Deeming the proposed settlement “fair, adequate, and reasonable,” a California federal judge approved a settlement in a consolidated class action lawsuit over Google LLC’s purported data sharing via its real-time bidding (RTB) and granted in part the plaintiffs’ motion for attorney fees, costs and service awards, applying the lodestar method to assess attorney fees due to the “speculative” nature of the plaintiffs’ evidence regarding the success of the injunctive relief sought.

  • March 27, 2026

    Judge: Copyright Act Preempts Certain Arguments In Ancestry Photo-Use Suit

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge held that plaintiffs in a putative class complaint plausibly allege misappropriation-based injuries because of Ancestry.com Operations Inc. and related entities using their yearbook photos without their permission, but the judge held that certain theories of misappropriation are preempted by federal copyright law.

  • March 27, 2026

    Homeowners Sue California FAIR Plan Association Over Wildfire Claim Handling

    LOS ANGELES — Joining a wave of lawsuits alleging that the California FAIR Plan Association (CFPA) improperly processes wildfire-related property insurance claims related to the 2025 Eaton and Palisades wildfires, two individuals who own a residential property filed a complaint in a California state court alleging that CFPA underpaid and mishandled their claim through unlawful claims practices.

  • March 26, 2026

    J&J Insists Circuits Are Split On Daubert Requirements For Class Certification

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A representative of a class action who argues that the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals properly found that a lower court relied on “an unexecuted damages model developed by an experienced economist” in granting certification of a class action mischaracterizes the case in her opposition to a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., and the high court must address the split the decision created, J&J says in a reply brief.

  • March 25, 2026

    Supreme Court Won’t Consider Revival Of Antitrust Claims To Copyright Row

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a real estate entity’s petition for a writ of certiorari, declining to hear arguments that the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals wrongly revived antitrust counterclaims filed against the entity in response to copyright claims it brought against another real estate entity; the petitioner had also argued that the Ninth Circuit wrongly created a novel theory of exclusive dealing based on customer misunderstanding.