Young

Young v. Renewal by Andersen, LLC

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 8, 202624-6095California729 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

JAN 8 2026

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BRENDA YOUNG, No. 24-6095 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 2:24-cv-01759-DJC-CKD v.

MEMORANDUM*

RENEWAL BY ANDERSEN, LLC;

ANDERSEN CORPORATION; RIVER

CITY WINDOW AND DOOR, INC.,

Defendants - Appellants.

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

Submitted December 5, 2025** San Francisco, California

Before: RAWLINSON and SANCHEZ, Circuit Judges, and ROSENTHAL, District Judge.***

* 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). *** The Honorable Lee H. Rosenthal, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas, sitting by designation. Brenda Young filed this class action in California state court asserting

claims under California law for (1) unfair competition, Cal.…

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.