Strumlauf

Strumlauf v. Starbucks Corp.

Caution
192 F. Supp. 3d 1025·2016 WL 3361842·89 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 1166·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79456
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 17, 2016Case No. 16-cv-01306-TEHCalifornia4,552 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Henderson, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS

This matter came before the Court on June 1,2016, on Defendant Starbucks Corporation’s motions to dismiss Plaintiffs Si-era' Strumlauf and Benjamin Robles’ Class Action Complaint. Having carefully considered the parties written and oral arguments, and for the reasons set forth below, the Court now GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendant’s motions.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs Siera Strumlauf and Benjamin Robles (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed their Class Action Complaint (“Compl.”) on March 16, 2016, alleging that Starbucks lattes are underfilled. Docket No. 1. Plaintiffs allege that “Starbucks represents on its menu that its Lattes contain ‘12 fl. oz.’ for a Tall, 16 fl. oz.’ for a Grande, and ‘20 fl. oz.’ for a Venti.” Compl. ¶ 1. Plaintiffs allege, however, that “Starbucks Lattes are uniformly underfilled pursuant to a standardized recipe. Tall Lattes are not 12 fluid ounces, Grande Lattes are not 16 fluid ounces, and Venti Lattes are not 20 fluid' ounces. Starbucks cheats purchasers by providing less fluid ounces in their Lattes than represented. In fact, Starbucks Lattes are approximately 25%…

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.