Newsletter RSS

Mealey's California Section 17200

  • 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.”

  • January 30, 2026

    Suit Dismissed After Plaintiffs Admit ‘Whopper’ Ads Used Real Burgers

    MIAMI — A Florida federal judge on Jan. 29 dismissed a false advertising lawsuit against Burger King Corp. (BKC) for allegedly deceptively advertising burgers including the “Whopper” to appear 35% larger than they actually are, after the parties filed a joint stipulation in which the plaintiffs “acknowledge” that BKC made the ads using its authentic beef patties and BKC said it will not pursue sanctions against the plaintiffs’ lawyers.

  • January 30, 2026

    Panel Affirms $1.5M Attorney Fees, No Restitution For Unfair Cemetery Contracts

    LOS ANGELES — A California appellate panel affirmed a state court’s rulings vacating a judgment finding the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles liable for violating California’s unfair competition law (UCL) against a certified class of grave purchasers by imposing unfair terms in burial contracts, but also ordering the archbishop to pay the plaintiffs $1.5 million in attorney fees under a “catalyst” theory because they obtained a “significant benefit” for “a large class of persons.”

  • January 29, 2026

    Hacked Facebook Account Plaintiffs Don’t Plead Meta Broke A Promise, Judge Says

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge granted in part Meta Platforms Inc.’s motion to dismiss a putative class action brought against it by users of its social media platforms who claim that it failed to prevent hacking of user accounts or help users regain access to their accounts in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL), writing that injury can be inferred but that the plaintiffs did not directly plead that Meta breached a contract or injured them based on loss of access to personal data.

  • January 28, 2026

    Data-Sharing Class Claims Against Shopify Partly Dismissed By Federal Judge

    OAKLAND, Calif. — After a previous dismissal ruling was reversed and remanded by the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, Shopify Inc. partly succeeded in its second motion to dismiss privacy claims against it, with a California federal judge finding that some of a plaintiff’s putative class claims over the online retailer’s purported collection and sharing of customer data for the creation of individualized profiles failed for not adequately alleging an injury.

  • January 27, 2026

    J&J Asks High Court To Decide If Experts Must Meet Daubert For Class Certification

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A woman asked the U.S. Supreme Court for an extension to respond to a petition for writ of certiorari filed by Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. (J&J), which asks the court to rule on whether expert testimony on damages during the class certification stage must comply with Federal Rule of Evidence 702, Fed. R. Evid. 702, and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.

  • January 23, 2026

    Dismissal Order Trims Claims In Class Case Over Apple’s Shared Analytics Setting

    SAN JOSE, Calif. — Apple Inc. mobile device users who allege in an amended consolidated putative class complaint that a setting on their devices meant to stop the sharing of their data doesn’t actually do that may proceed with breach of contract and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing claims and claims brought under New York, New Jersey and Illinois law, a federal judge in California ruled, granting Apple’s motion to partially dismiss other privacy-related, unfair competition law (UCL) and unjust enrichment claims.

  • January 22, 2026

    Job Seekers Accuse AI Application Screener Of Unfair Evaluations

    MARTINEZ, Calif. — Two unsuccessful job applicants filed a putative class action in California state court accusing an AI employee-screening company of violating California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by evaluating the plaintiffs’ applications to companies that use the AI software at issue to score their applications based on “sensitive and often inaccurate information.”

  • January 20, 2026

    Nestle Given More Time To Seek Rehearing After Classes Upheld In Labeling Case

    PASADENA, Calif. — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals gave Nestle USA Inc. until Feb. 23 to petition for rehearing after a divided panel affirmed a trial court’s certification of two California classes of consumers in a case accusing the company of labeling that falsely implies that its chocolate products are produced without child labor and deforestation in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA).

  • January 20, 2026

    General Mills, Consumer Agree To Dismiss Sugary Snack Appeal Due To New Precedent

    SAN FRANCISCO — A food company and a consumer of its fruit snack products on Jan. 16 filed a joint stipulation of dismissal in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, writing that their appeal involved the same question of law decided by the Ninth Circuit in a separate appeal and that they wish to proceed based upon that ruling’s explanation of how a defendant can defeat remand for lack of equitable jurisdiction in a putative class action.

  • January 20, 2026

    Panel Rejects RNC Claims Against Google For Filtering Fundraising Emails As Spam

    HONOLULU — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Jan. 16 affirmed the dismissal of the Republican National Committee (RNC) lawsuit against Google LLC for violating the state’s common-carrier statute and California’s unfair competition law (UCL) by diverting its fundraising emails to users’ spam folders.

  • January 20, 2026

    Panel Vacates Remand Of False Discount Suit Against Window-And-Door Sellers

    SAN FRANCISCO — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel vacated the remand of a putative class action against a window-and-door replacement company and its affiliates for their alleged practice of misrepresenting their prices as time-limited discounts during consultations with customers in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) to California state court, writing that the federal court should have given the appellants an “‘opportunity to waive’” the issue upon which remand was based.

  • January 16, 2026

    Panel Affirms Dismissal Of Senior’s Age Discrimination Dispute Against Gym

    LOS ANGELES — A California appellate panel on Jan. 15 affirmed the grant of summary judgment on a pro se former gym member’s claims against a gym and its manager for violating California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and engaging in age discrimination by discontinuing its participation in an insurer’s program that covered membership dues for insureds over age 65.

  • January 16, 2026

    Putative Class Complaining Of Shrinking Crocs Fails To Allege Fraud, Judge Finds

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge on Jan. 15 granted in part and denied in part Crocs Inc.’s motion to dismiss a putative class action brought against it by consumers who say Crocs violated California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other laws by representing Crocs-brand shoes as weather-resistant when they in fact can shrink due to heat, finding the plaintiffs insufficiently alleged their fraud-based claims.

  • January 16, 2026

    $30 Million Settlement Of Kids’ Privacy Suit Against Google Gets Final OK

    SAN JOSE, Calif. — About four months after preliminarily approving a $30 million agreement that would settle invasion of privacy claims against YouTube LLC and Google LLC (Google, collectively) for the purported collection of minors’ personally identifiable information (PII) in violation of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), a California federal magistrate judge granted a final approval motion, ending the more than six-year-old class action.