Porath

Porath v. Logitech Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 18, 20193:18-cv-03091California3,562 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

19 In this consumer putative class action, plaintiff moves to certify two classes under Rule 20 23(b)(3). For the reasons stated herein, however, the proposed class representative, a three-time 21 convicted felon, cannot be trusted as a fiduciary to lead any class. The motion for class 22 certification is DENIED. 23

STATEMENT

24 Defendant Logitech, Inc. manufactures, distributes, and sells a computer speaker system 25 called the “Logitech Z200.” The complaint alleges that Logitech falsely and deceptively 26 advertised its Z200 speakers as containing four drivers when two of those “drivers” did not 27 independently produce sound and were merely parasitic. In brief, speaker systems contain a 28 component called a “driver,” which is an electromagnetic coil that turns modulated electrical 1 signals into sound waves. So, the greater number of drivers, the louder, perhaps richer, the 2 sound (Dkt. No. 1 ¶¶ 1, 3–5, 30, 32, 41, 42). 3 Another component in the Z200 looks like a driver, but does not independently produce 4 sound, called the “passive driver” (by Logitech) or the “passive radiator” (by plaintiff). This 5 component merely allows sound to…

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.