Postpichal

Postpichal v. Cricket Wireless, LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 31, 20203:19-cv-07270California5,733 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

9

10 JERMAINE THOMAS, JERMAINE

MILLER, JAMIE POSTPICHAL,

11 RONALD ELLISON, SARAH WATERS, No. C 19-07270 WHA

KAMILAH RIDDICK, FELICIA

12 RIDDICK, TIARA CROMWELL, LYSHA

ENCARNACION, LANI HALE, MELIZZA

13 WEAVER, ALFREDO SANCHEZ, and ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS CLARISSA KELLY, on behalf of OR TRANSFER 14 themselves and others similarly situated, 15 Plaintiffs, 16 v.

17 CRICKET WIRELESS LLC, 18 Defendant.

19 20 INTRODUCTION 21 In this putative class action, defendant moves to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction 22 and improper venue, or to transfer venue. For the reasons stated below, the motion is DENIED. 23 STATEMENT 24 The claims in the first-amended complaint, our operative complaint, all stem from 25 allegations that Defendant Cricket Wireless, LLC, engaged in a marketing scheme touting 26 nationwide, unlimited 4G/LTE coverage, despite Cricket knowing that its service fell far short 27 of providing 4G/LTE…

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.