Adkins

Adkins v. Apple Inc.

Good Law
147 F. Supp. 3d 913·2014 WL 10748108·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185022
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 3, 2014Case No. 14-cv-01619-WHOCalifornia5,018 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Orrick, J.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS IN PART AND DENYING IN PART

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs Patricia Sue Adkins, Jennifer Galindo, and Fabrienne English have sued defendants Apple, Inc., AppleCare Service Company, Inc., and Apple CSC, Inc. (collectively, “Apple”) for consumer fraud. They allege that Apple salespersons represented that Apple service plans entitled plaintiffs to new replacement devices and parts, when in fact Apple uses secondhand replacement devices and parts, and that they would not have purchased the service plans but for this alleged misrepresentation. Contrary to Apple’s contention, that is sufficient for Article III standing, and plaintiffs have stated plausible claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law, and Consumer Legal Rights Act. On the other hand, Adkins’s and Galin-do’s claims under the Secondhand Merchandise Labeling Law claim are DISMISSED WITHOUT ' LEAVE TO AMEND because they did not purchase any secondhand products. English’s Secondhand Merchandise Labeling claim survives based on her allegation that she purchased a used iPhone that Apple did not indicate was used. Plaintiffs did not provide pre-suit notice of the alleged…

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.