Gianino v. Alacer Corp.
District Court, C.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
CORMAC J. CARNEY, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Nicholas Gianino, Arnold Lee, and Lori Risman (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) *1099have brought claims on behalf of themselves and putative class members asserting that Defendant Alacer Corporation (“Alacer”) violated California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), False Advertising Law (“FAL”), and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”) by falsely representing that its product, Emergen-C, benefits one’s immune system. Plaintiffs now move to certify a nationwide class based on Federal…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. CampbellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Coleman v. Quaker Oats Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Edgar v. Mite Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Mazza v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Forcellati v. Hyland's, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2012
- Gustafson v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LPDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2013
- Allen v. Hyland's Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2014
- Hughes v. Ester C Co., NBTYDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2016
- In re Packaged Seafood Products Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2017
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.