Fust
Fust v. Gilead Sciences, Inc.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ----oo0oo---- 11 12 DEBORAH FUST, INDIVIDUALLY AND No. 2:23-cv-2853 WBS DB
ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS
13 SIMILARLY SITUATED; AND EDWARD
PIMENTEL, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON
14 BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
SITUATED,
15 Plaintiffs, 16 v. 17
GILEAD SCIENCES, INC., A
18 DELAWARE CORPORATION REGISTERED
TO DO BUSINESS AND HEADQUARTERED
19 IN CALIFORNIA, 20 Defendant. 21 22 ----oo0oo---- 23 Plaintiffs Deborah Fust and Edward Pimentel originally 24 filed this putative class action against defendant Gilead 25 Sciences, Inc. (“Gilead”) in Shasta County Superior Court, 26 seeking monetary and equitable relief pursuant to California’s 27 Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Claim 1); False Advertising Law 28 (Claim 2); Unfair Competition Law (Claim 3); money had and 1 received (Claim 4); negligent misrepresentation (Claim 5); and 2 unjust enrichment (Claim 6). Plaintiffs allege that defendant 3 exaggerated the benefits and downplayed the dangers of its drug 4 …