9 results for 'judge:"Seeborg"'.
J. Seeborg grants summary judgment on the last remaining claims in a contract dispute between guitarist Craig Chaquico and the band Jefferson Starship over Chaquico's royalties. After several proceedings over the years, the only issues remaining are an accounting claim against the band for financial documents and a counterclaim from the band over royalty cost deductions. The band prevails on both, as a 1991 termination agreement allows the band to deduct costs and expenses from Chaquico's royalties and he has already received all the accounting documents to which he is entitled.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Seeborg, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv4907, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Contract
J. Seeborg dismisses contract claims brought by a pair of commercial real estate companies alleging that the bank backtracked on a promise to give them a $6.6 million loan. The claims have already been dismissed once before for failure to state a claim, and the same is true for the amended complaint. The bank may have offered reassurances and encouragement about their loan, but stopped short of outright promising that a loan was incoming. Contract claims cannot survive on reassurances alone.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Seeborg, Filed On: September 19, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv5033, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Banking / Lending, Contract
J. Seeborg grants preliminary approval to a class action settlement in a dispute over allegedly unpaid wages between a class of employees and their employer. The settlement, with a net amount of $44,040,833.33, appears fair, adequate and reasonable. Minor modifications to the class definitions, namely expanding the class period through the date of preliminary approval and a change to the definition of the class of hourly employees to specify that it includes all retail employees, do not meaningfully change this analysis.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Seeborg, Filed On: July 28, 2023, Case #: 3:16cv1854, NOS: Other Labor Litigation - Labor, Categories: Employment, Settlements, Class Action
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Seeborg denies both the LED holder manufacturer and its customer's motions to exclude each other's expert witnesses, an accountant and the manufacturer's president. The accountant's methodology for calculating damages is not so irrelevant or unreliable as to require exclusion, and questions about the accuracy and appropriateness of certain figures used in his report are better left for trial. That accountant's opinion as to whether or not the parties' agreement's liquidated damages terms are reasonable is also admissible. The president, meanwhile, has offered testimony that falls within his personal experience and knowledge, and need not include a written report with his expert disclosure. Disputes over the figures he uses are similarly better evaluated at trial, and while his rebuttal report improperly provides legal conclusions, they do not justify wholesale exclusion of the report.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Seeborg, Filed On: July 28, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv1886, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Experts, Contract
J. grants preliminary approval to a $3.4 million settlement with pharmaceutical manufactures Amneal and Lupin in a class action accusing them and other manufacturers of delaying the generic version of Xyrem, a narcolepsy drug.
The settlement, which only applies to one of the classes, will not be distributed to the settlement class members, but rather will be used to support continued litigation against the remaining defendants.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Seeborg, Filed On: May 12, 2023, Case #: 3:20md2966, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: Antitrust, Settlements, Class Action
J. Seeborg allows the consumer to proceed with only his misleading-by-omission claim in his class action accusing KIND of misrepresenting the amount of digestible protein in its products. It is “at least plausible” that KIND’s failure to comply with the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act (FDCA) requirement that it must list the percent daily value of actual digestible protein on its nutrition facts panel renders its protein content claim misleading. However, his remaining claims are either expressly or impliedly preempted by the FDCA.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Seeborg, Filed On: May 11, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv6654, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Fraud, Class Action, False Advertising