Kapil

Kapil v. Apple, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 8, 20255:24-cv-09304California1,776 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 SANDEEP KAPIL, et al., Case No. 24-cv-09304-NW

8 Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

9 v. DISMISS

10 APPLE, INC., Re: ECF No. 32 Defendant. 11

12 13 On March 7, 2025, Defendant Apple, Inc. (“Apple” or “Defendant”) filed a motion to 14 dismiss Plaintiffs’ class action complaint. Mot., ECF No. 32. Having considered the parties’ 15 briefs and the relevant legal authority, the Court concluded that oral argument was not required, 16 see N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b), and vacated the hearing set for July 9, 2025. The Court GRANTS 17 Defendant’s motion with leave to amend. 18 I. BACKGROUND 19 Plaintiffs Sandeep Kapil, Kim Sallen, and Gabriela Gomez (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring 20 this case on behalf of themselves, and all others similarly situated. Compl., ECF No. 1. Plaintiffs 21 purchased Apple products. Id. ¶ 5. All three Plaintiffs lost money in cryptocurrency scams. Id. 22 In August 2023, Plaintiff Kapil downloaded Digicoins, a…

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.