Jadeja

Jadeja v. Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc.

Good Law
764 F. Supp. 2d 1192·2011 WL 499967·2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12246
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 8, 2011C 10-04287 WHACalifornia1,641 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alsup, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

INTRODUCTION

In this proposed class action dispute over the legality of cost-neutral clauses in contracts between defendants and various municipalities and agencies throughout California, defendants move to dismiss the action. Because plaintiff lacks standing, the motion is Granted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1).

STATEMENT

Plaintiff S.D. Jadeja is a resident of Palo Alto. Defendants Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc., and Redflex Traffic Systems (California), Inc., are “provider[s] of road safety cameras” (Compl. ¶ 16). Defendant American Traffic Solutions, Inc., is a “provider of technology and business solutions for photo traffic safety and electronic toll enforcement programs” (id. ¶ 19). On August 30, 2009, plaintiff drove through the intersection of Ravenswood Avenue and El Camino Real in Menlo Park. An automated traffic-enforcement camera recorded a video of plaintiff driving through the intersection. Approximately a month later, an employee of Redflex sent plaintiff a notice to appear, claiming that plaintiff had violated California Vehicle Code Section 21453(a) by failing to stop at a red light while driving…

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.