Cases

OPINION AND ORDER Seibel, District Judge. Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint. (Doc. 32.) For the following reasons, the motion is GRANTED. I. Background A. Facts For purposes of this motion, the Court accepts as true the facts, but not the conclusions, alleged by Plaintiff in the Second Amended Compl

FUENTES, Circuit Judge, concurring: I agree that under our existing precedent, City Select must be given an opportunity to demonstrate, using the Creditsmarts database and affidavits from potential class members, that there is a reliable and administratively feasible means to determine whether putative class members fall within the class definition. I write separately because this case highlights the unneces

MEMORANDUM WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR., CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Pending before the Court in this removed action is Defendant WFM-Wo, Inc. d/b/a Whole Foods Market’s (“Whole Foods”) Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 5), to which Plaintiff Holly Lynn Jones on behalf of herself and her minor child ECJ have filed a response (Doc. No. 13) and Whole Foods has replied (Doc. No. 14). For the reasons that follow

KENNETH M. KARAS, District Judge: Charlotte once told Wilbur that “[p]eo-ple are very gullible; They’ll believe anything they see in print.” According to Plaintiff Edward J. Reynolds, D.D.S. (“Plaintiff’), the same apparently goes for phone calls. Plaintiff brings the instant Complaint, on his own behalf and on behalf of a putative class, alleging that'he was the victim of Defendants’ deceptive business practices. (Am. CompL

MARGO K. BRODIE, United States District Judge: *181Plaintiff Tamika Daniel commenced a putative class action on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated against Defendant Mondelez International Inc. (Compl., Docket Entry No. 1.) Plaintiff alleges that "non-functional slack-fill" ("excessive empty space") in Defendant's Swedish Fish b

OPINION AND ORDER JESSE M. FURMAN, District Judge: Plaintiffs Eli Weisblum and James Loren Gibbs bring this putative consumer class action against Prophase Labs, Inc. (“Prophase”) and its Chief Executive Officer, Theodore W. Karkus (together with Prophase, “Defendants”), alleging various federal and state claims arising out of their marketing and sale of Cold-EEZE cold remedy products (“Cold-EE

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DOUGLAS P. WOODLOCK, District Judge. Before’" me, following a fairness hearing and the submission of various post-hearing materials as I directed, is a proposed settlement agreement between the defendants, Vibram USA Inc. and Vibram Five-Fingers LLC (collectively, “Vibram”), both Massachusetts residents, and a nationwide class of consumers who purchased Five-Fingers “barefo

Filed 12/15/15; pub. order 1/12/16 (see end of opn.) NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

MEMORANDUM OPINION Emmet G. Sullivan, United States District Judge I. Introduction Drawing an analogy to the fate of penguins whose destinies appear doomed in the face of uncertain environmental changes; Defendant. Staples Inc. (“Staples”) and Defendant Office Depot, Inc. (“Office Depot”) (collectively “Defendants”) argue they are l

OPINION AND ORDER RAMOS, District Judge. This putative class action arises from Plaintiffs’ allegations that Boulder Brands, Inc. (“Boulder”) and GFA Brands, Inc. (“GFA”) (collectively, the “Defendants”) deceptively labeled as “fat free” certain milk products that — due to the addition of an omega-3 oil blend — in fact contained one gram of fat per serving. Plaintiffs bring three claims under N

Filed 12/15/15; pub. order 1/12/16 (see end of opn.); reposted to remove the “not to be published” legend IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE JAMES G. SPEIRS et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, G048698 v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2011-00508691) B

*546ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE MARGARET M. MORROW, District Judge. On June 28, 2011, Robert Briseno filed a complaint against ConAgra.1 Between October and December 2011, the court consolidated several eases filed against Co

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER SPATT, District Judge. On July 31, 2012, the Plaintiff Altagracia Diaz (the “Plaintiff’), on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, commenced this action against the Defendant Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. (the “Defendant” or “RCS”) for alleged unlawful credit and collection practices engaged in by the Defendant in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Prac

OPINION & ORDER NELSON S. ROMÁN, United States District Judge Plaintiffs Michael Goldemberg, Annie Le, and Howard Petlack (“Named Plaintiffs” or “Plaintiffs”) each bring consumer protection claims against Defendant Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. (“Johnson & Johnson”) in this proposed class action under the laws of their home states: New York, California, and Florida, respectively. Pur

487 F.Supp. 653 (1980) Robert SEIFFER et al., Plaintiffs, v. TOPSY'S INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al., Defendants. BEAR, STEARNS & CO., et al., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. TOUCHE ROSS & CO. et al., Third-Party Defendants. G. WALKER & COMPANY, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. G. Kenneth BAUM et al., Third-Party Defendants. BEAR, STEARNS & CO., et al., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs

John M. Walker, Jr., Circuit Judge: *91Connecticut resident Heidi Langan sued Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. ("Johnson & Johnson") on behalf of herself and "all others similarly situated" for deceptive labeling. Plaintiff alleged that several of the company's baby products were labeled "natural" when they were not. Langan claim

MEMORANDUM & ORDER PAMELA K. CHEN, United States District Judge: Plaintiffs Patrick Hughes and Nafise Nina Hodjat (together, “Plaintiffs”) bring this putative class action against Defendants The Ester C Company, NBTY, Inc., and Natures-mart LLC (collectively, “Defendants”), alleging that Defendants’ labeling of its “Ester-C” vitamin C supplements (the “Products”) as “The Better Vitamin C” is unlawful,

OPINION & ORDER PAUL A. CROTTY, District Judge: On May 21, 2013, Plaintiff Adrianna Ault filed her complaint that Defendant J.M. Smucker Co., owner of the Crisco brand, violated N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law (“GBL”) §§ 349 and 350, and breached an express warranty by labelling certain Crisco cooking oils as “All Natural.” This is claimed to be misleading, because the oils are made using genetically modif

OPINION & ORDER SIDNEY H. STEIN, District Judge. Plaintiffs in this putative class action allege fraud and deceptive business practices by It’s Just Lunch International (“IJL”), a provider of personalized matchmaking services that operates nationally through franchises.1 Plaintiffs proposed that both a national class of plaintiffs and a New York class of plaintiffs

GARAUFIS, District Judge: This expedited appeal arises out of an order entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Rakoff, J.) certifying two classes in this securities fraud action against Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. — Petrobras (“Petrobras”) and various other defendants. See In re Petrobras Sec. Litig. (the “Certification Order”), 312 F.R.D. 354 (S.D.N.Y. 2016).<