Garnica

Garnica v. HomeTeam Pest Defense, Inc.

Good Law
230 F. Supp. 3d 1155·2017 WL 495615·96 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1163·2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65469
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 3, 2017Case No. 14-cv-05243-VCCalifornia2,610 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chhabria, J.

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

HomeTeam Pest Defense developed a pest control system that involves building homes with tube systems in the walls. The benefit of the tube system is that pesticides can be sprayed into the tubes from a port on the outside of the house. After being sprayed into the port, the pesticides exit the tubes through various perforations, killing pests inside the walls. The pesticides apparently don’t find their way into the living area of the home.

HomeTeam enters into deals with home-builders for installation of the tube sys- *1157 terns as the homes are being built. Then HomeTeam enters into contracts with homeowners to “service” the systems (that is, to periodically spray pesticides into the ports).

The plaintiffs in this case are Jose Luis Garnica, who lives in Fresno, and Cora Potter, who lives in Bakersfield. Both their homes have tube systems. And both hired HomeTeam to service their systems. Gar-nica and Potter contend that HomeTeam has violated the antitrust laws by engaging in a variety of improper conduct to prevent competitors from entering the market for servicing the tube systems, which in turn has forced homeowners to pay…

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.