Bronson-v-Samsung Electronics America, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 29, 20193:18-cv-02300California3,000 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

20 In this putative class action under the Song-Beverly Act and Section 17200 of the 21 California Business and Professions Code, plaintiff Crystal Hardin moves to certify a class for 22 purposes of settlement and for preliminary approval of the class settlement. For the reasons 23 below, the motion for preliminary approval of class settlement is DENIED. Because the 24 settlement falls, the motion to certify the settlement class is DENIED AS MOOT. 25

STATEMENT

26 The Song-Beverly Act requires “[e]very manufacturer making an express warranty with 27 respect to an electronic or appliance product” to “make available to service and repair facilities 28 sufficient service literature and functional parts to effect the repair of a product for at least 1 seven-year period exceeds the warranty period for the product.” CAL. CIV. CODE § 1793.03(b). 2 Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. 3 manufactured plasma televisions during our period in question. 4 Plaintiffs Crystal Hardin and Alexis Bronson each bought Samsung plasma televisions 5 in 2013. Both television sets had been manufactured in 2013 and later developed…

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.