Margaretha Widjaja v. Jpmorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

facts plausibly suggesting that even if she had reported an unauthorized transfer within the 60-day period, the subsequent unauthorized transfers for which she sought reimbursement would still have occurred.

Affirming the dismissal of additional state law claims, the panel held that plaintiff’s claim for breach of contract ** This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader.

WIDJAJA V. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK

failed because a Privacy Notice appended to her Deposit Account Agreement did not impose any substantive duties on Chase. The panel held that plaintiff’s claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing failed because the Deposit Account Agreement expressly permitted Chase to close plaintiff’s accounts.

COUNSEL

Paro Astourian (argued), Astourian & Associates Inc., Pasadena, California, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Karin L. Bohmholdt (argued) and Blakeley S. Oranburg, Greenburg Traurig LLP, Los Angeles, California, for Defendant-Appellee.

OPINION

WATFORD, Circuit Judge:

To address concerns raised by the increasing prevalence of electronic banking…