Gulkarov

Gulkarov v. Plum, Pbc

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 25, 202524-2766California1,190 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 25 2025

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN RE: PLUM BABY FOOD LITIGATION No. 24-2766 D.C. No. 4:21-cv-00913-YGR

LUDMILA GULKAROV; JANINE

TORRENCE; KELLY MCKEON; JOSH

CRAWFORD; VANESSA MEMORANDUM*

MATHIESEN; AUTUMN

ELLISON; JESSICA DAVID; SARAH

BROWN; TOMMY NURRE; CHRISTINA

GONZALEZ, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

PLUM, PBC, a Delaware corporation,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted April 3, 2025 San Francisco, California

Before: HURWITZ, KOH, and JOHNSTONE, Circuit Judges.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. In this putative class action, Plaintiffs allege that Plum, PBC (“Plum”),

which manufactures and sells baby foods, violated California’s Consumer Legal

Remedies Act (“CLRA”) and Unfair…

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.