Sponchiado

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CHRISTIAN SPONCHIADO, et al., Case No. 18-cv-07533-HSG

8 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

9 v. MOTION TO DISMISS

10 APPLE INC., Re: Dkt. No. 27 11 Defendant.

12 13 Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint 14 (“FAC”). Dkt. No. 27 (“Mot.”). For the reasons articulated below, the Court GRANTS IN 15 PART AND DENIES IN PART Defendant’s motion to dismiss. 16 I. BACKGROUND 17 Plaintiffs Christian Sponchiado and Courtney Davis bring this putative consumer class 18 action against Defendant Apple, Inc., alleging that Apple misrepresented the pixel resolutions and 19 display sizes for the iPhone X, iPhone XS, and iPhone XS Max products (the “iPhone Products”). 20 See generally Dkt. No. 26 (“FAC”). The FAC alleges the following facts, which are taken as true 21 for the purpose of deciding the motion to dismiss. 1 22 A. Screen Pixels 23 A pixel is a…