Long

Long v. Hewlett-Packard Co.

Good Law
316 F. App'x 585
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 3, 2009No. 07-16440California592 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Plaintiffs Lewis Long (“Long”) and Therry Simien (“Simien,” and collectively, “Plaintiffs”) appeal the district court’s rul *586 ings in favor of Appellee Hewlett-Packard (“HP”). The district court dismissed with prejudice Plaintiffs’ various state law class action claims for breach of express warranty and fraudulent concealment in violation of the California Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) and California Consumers Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”). We affirm the dismissal of Plaintiffs’ claims.

Under California law, time limits in express warranties are effective at limiting the coverage of the warranty to defects that manifest themselves during the specified time period. Daugherty v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 144 Cal.App.4th 824 , 51 Cal.Rptr .3d 118, 122-24 (2006). Although there may be an exception to this general rule for products that are truly “substantially likely to fail” during their useful lives, Hicks v. Kaufman and Broad Home Corp., 89 Cal.App.4th 908 , 107 Cal.Rptr.2d 761, 773 (2001), Plaintiffs do not allege facts that all HP Pavilion inverters of the models covered by this class were substantially likely to fail. Instead, they allege that, in general, HP laptops…

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.