Peacock

Peacock v. Pabst Brewing Company

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 24, 202524-2494California573 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

APR 24 2025

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BRENDAN PEACOCK, No. 24-2494 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellant, 2:18-cv-00568-DJC-CKD v.

MEMORANDUM*

PABST BREWING COMPANY,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Daniel J. Calabretta, District Court, Presiding

Submitted April 9, 2025** Pasadena, California

Before: CALLAHAN, DESAI, and DE ALBA, Circuit Judges.

Brendan Peacock appeals the district court’s denial of class certification and

the grant of summary judgment against his claims under California’s Unfair

Competition Law (“UCL”) for allegedly false or deceptive advertising. He claims

that Defendant-Appellee Pabst Brewing Co. (“Pabst”) misled consumers with the

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). labeling on its now-discontinued Olympia Beer…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.