Susan Yoon v. the Gap, Inc.

MEMORANDUM

Susan Yoon appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment on her claims arising out of an advertisement run by The GAP in May 2006 (the “Summer Promotion”). Yoon pleaded five claims: (1) violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”); (2) violation of California’s False Advertising Law (“FAL”); (3) violation of California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”); (4) common law fraud; and (5) breach of contract. The district court found that the Summer Promotion was neither objectively misleading nor deceptive and granted summary judgment in favor of The GAP on all the claims. We reverse and remand.

“[W]hether a business practice is deceptive will usually be a question of fact....” Williams v. Gerber Prods. Co., 552 F.3d 934, 938 (9th Cir.2008). Because we cannot say that “[the Summer Promotion] itself ma[kes] it impossible for [Yoon] to prove that a reasonable consumer was likely to be deceived,” id. at 939 , we reverse and remand the district court’s ruling that, as a matter of law, the Summer Promotion was neither misleading nor deceptive, cf. Freeman v. Time, Inc., 68 F.3d 285 , 289- 90 (9th Cir.1995). Accordingly, the summary judgment rulings on…