Larin

Larin v. Bank of America, N.A.

Good Law
725 F. Supp. 2d 1212·2010 WL 2889111·2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74289
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJuly 22, 2010Case 09cv1062 DMS (RBB)California2,950 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sabraw, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

On September 30, 2009, this Court granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint because Plaintiffs claims were preempted by the Expedited Funds Availability Act (“EFAA”) and the National Bank Act (“NBA”). After obtaining new counsel to represent him in this matter, Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint that realleges the claims in the First Amended Complaint. In response to the Second Amended Complaint, Defendant filed the present motion to dismiss. Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion, and Defendant filed a reply. For the reasons discussed below, the Court grants Defendant’s motion.

I.

BACKGROUND

This ease is a purported class action alleging violations of California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”), unfair competition and false advertising laws, and a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The named Plaintiff, Eduardo Larin, had a checking account and credit card with Defendant Bank of America. Plaintiff was also enrolled in one of Defendant’s overdraft protection plans, specifically, one which linked his credit card to his checking…

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.