Day

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JONATHAN DAY, et al., Case No. 22-cv-04305-VC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

v. DISMISS

ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC., Re: Dkt. No. 99 Defendant.

The motion to dismiss is denied. This order assumes the reader’s familiarity with the factual allegations, the relevant law, and the parties’ arguments. While it is a close call on both implied warranty and fraud, the third amended complaint does just enough to survive dismissal. Implied Warranty Claims. Although the implied warranty of merchantability “does not impose a general requirement that goods precisely fulfill the expectation of the buyer,” the warranty does require the goods be fit for their ordinary purpose. American Suzuki Motor Corp. v. Superior Court, 37 Cal. App. 4th 1291, 1296 (1995); see also Birdsong v. Apple, Inc., 590 F.3d 955, 958 (9th Cir. 2009). Thus, a determination of a product’s merchantability turns on the characterization of its “ordinary purpose” and the extent to which any defect impairs that purpose. AMD argues the ordinary purpose of its CPUs “is to run the PCs in which they are installed.” In…