Postpichal
Postpichal v. Cricket Wireless, LLC
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JAMIE POSTPICHAL, et al., Plaintiffs, No. C 19–07270 WHA
v.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION
CRICKET WIRELESS, LLC, TO DISMISS CLRA CLAIMS Defendant.
15 16 California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act bans certain practices that the California legislature has deemed to be “unfair” or “deceptive.” Plaintiffs allege claims under CLRA Sections 1170(a)(5), (7), and (9), which prohibit misleading representations and advertisements. Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit with CLRA claims for injunctive relief only, waited 30 days, then amended their complaint to include damages claims. Plaintiffs have not alleged that a CLRA notice was sent to Cricket with regard to this matter prior to amending the complaint to include damages. CLRA has a specific notice requirement set out in 1782(d):
An action for injunctive relief brought under the specific provisions of Section 1770 may be commenced without compliance with subdivision (a). Not less…