Consumer plaintiffs responded to computer maker’s Lenovo’s motion to dismiss on Monday, arguing that Lenovo advocates for a premature resolution of their claims. The filing is the latest in the Northern District of California class action accusing Lenovo of placing inflated prices on its website in order to con shoppers into believing they are receiving a better deal than they actually are on personal computers.
According to the opposition, Lenovo serves up a single argument in favor of dismissal: that the consumers’ equitable claims under the California False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law must be dismissed because the consumers do not allege that they lack an adequate remedy at law. That question is reserved for a later stage of the litigation, the opposition says.
The plaintiffs distinguish the primary case supporting Lenovo’s proposition, arguing that it deals with a court’s ability to award equitable relief. “Unlike Sonner, the instant case has just begun, and the appropriate remedy to award Plaintiffs is not at issue. Plaintiffs merely seek to plead their legal and equitable claims in the alternative, which they are entitled to do under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,” the consumers contend.
In addition, they argue that dismissal would be unfair, because they have yet to uncover all underlying facts of the dispute and are still developing their legal theories. “As such, there is a factual issue as to whether Plaintiffs’ legal claims are satisfied, and the adequacy of any remedies flowing from those claims should be decided at summary judgment or trial,” the plaintiffs say.
Oral argument is scheduled for mid-January before Judge Jeffrey S. White.
The plaintiffs are represented by Edge, A Professional Law Corporation and Capstone Law APC and the defendant by Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP.
