Sarah Vitort v. Kroger Company

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 28, 202322-35185California1,037 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 28 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SARAH VITORT, a consumer residing in No. 22-35185 Oregon, individually and on behalf of all others situated, D.C. No. 3:20-cv-01317-AC

Plaintiff-Appellant,

MEMORANDUM*

v.

KROGER COMPANY; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Marco A. Hernandez, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 21, 2023** Portland, Oregon

Before: RAWLINSON, BEA, and SUNG, Circuit Judges.

Plaintiff-Appellant Sarah Vitort appeals from the district court’s dismissal of

her putative class action complaint against Defendants-Appellees The Kroger

Company and Fred Meyer Stores, Inc. (together, “Kroger”). She alleged that

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Kroger violated multiple provisions of the…

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.