Yick

discussion that took place at the preliminary injunction hearing on May 13, 2021. 1. The plaintiffs have demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on their claims that Bank of America (BofA) has violated, and continues to violate, the Electronic Fund Transfers Act by failing to conduct an adequate, good faith investigation when cardholders report unauthorized charges, and often simply freezing cardholder accounts based on a faulty screening process. 15 U.S.C. § 1693f. This has resulted (and will likely continue to result) in the improper denial of cardholders’ reimbursement claims for unauthorized charges, the unlawful deprivation of provisional credits for such charges, and the inability to access benefits to which cardholders are entitled. For similar reasons, the plaintiffs have demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on their claims that BofA is systematically breaching its contracts with cardholders and violating California’s Unfair Competition Law. 2. Provisional certification of a class of all cardholders who call to report unauthorized charges to their accounts is warranted for purposes of a preliminary injunction. See, e.g., Zepeda Rivas v. Jennings, 445 F. Supp. 3d…