On Monday, computer maker Lenovo moved to dismiss allegations that it misled consumers about the price of laptops in a California Unfair Competition Law (UCL), False Advertising Law (FAL), and Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) class action. Lenovo Inc. principally argued that the plaintiffs’ equitable claims should be dismissed because the litigants did not demonstrate that they lack an adequate remedy at law.
The lawsuit was filed in Oakland, California in August by two consumers who purchased Lenovo laptops from the company’s website. The plaintiffs alleged their belief that they were receiving a discount from the laptop’s advertised “regular price,” when, in fact, that price was not the laptop’s true regular price, but an inflated one. As such, the plaintiffs contend that they did not receive the discount they thought they were getting.
In this week’s motion, Lenovo asserted that “plaintiffs cannot pursue equitable claims unless they (at minimum) plausibly allege that they lack an adequate remedy at law.” The defendant claims that this tenant finds support in Ninth Circuit holdings, which confirm that the rule applies to UCL, FAL, and unjust enrichment claims, which are equitable by nature, and CLRA claims seeking equitable relief, as the plaintiffs’ CLRA claims do.
“The alleged injury – overpayment due to allegedly false and deceptive reference pricing – is inherently subject to a remedy at law,” the complaint explains, asking for dismissal of those claims with prejudice.
The hearing is currently scheduled for Jan. 14, 2022 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.
