Legal Opinion
Frenzel v. Aliphcom
District Court, N.D. California
Decided December 29, 2014No. Case No. 14-cv-03587-WHOPublishedCited by 62 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
Re: Dkt. No. 13
WILLIAM H. ORRICK, United States District Judge
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Robert Frenzel brings this putative class action against defendant Aliph-Com dba Jawbone (“Jawbone”), alleging that he was fraudulently induced to purchase a Jawbone UP fitness-tracker wristband by misrepresentations regarding the product’s battery life and general functionality. ' Jawbone moves to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), arguing that Frenzel’s claims are precluded by California’s choice-of-law rules and, in addition, are not adequately alleged. I…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Navarro v. BlockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Lee v. City Of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- In Re Gilead Sciences Securities LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Car Carriers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company and Nu-Car Carriers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by62 opinions
- T & M Solar & Air Conditioning, Inc. v. Lennox International Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
- Kardovich v. Pfizer, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2015
- Colgate v. Juul Labs, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2018
- Marino v. Coach, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2017
- Germinaro v. Fidelity National Title InsuranceDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2015
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.