NOTICE of Supplemental Authority by Bank of America, N.A. re 84 MOTION to Dismiss for… — Bofa Ca Unemployment (Dkt. 108)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California · No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB · Doc. 108 · 2022-09-07 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL 
AUTHORITY 
 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 
JAMES W. MCGARRY (pro hac vice)
JMcGarry@goodwinlaw.com 
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 
100 Northern Avenue  
Boston, MA 02210 
Tel.: +1 617 570 1000 
Fax: +1 617 523 1231  
Attorney for Defendant 
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 
 
[ADDITIONAL COUNSEL LISTED IN SIGNATURE BLOCK] 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - 
SAN DIEGO DIVISION 
IN RE: BANK OF AMERICA 
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT 
BENEFITS LITIGATION 
Case No. 3:21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB
DEFENDANT BANK OF 
AMERICA, N.A.’S NOTICE OF 
SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY 
Ctrm: 
14A - 14th Floor 
Judge: 
Hon. Larry Alan Burns 
 
 
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 108     Filed 09/07/22     PageID.898     Page 1
of 3

 
NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL 
AUTHORITY 
2 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 
In connection with the Court’s consideration of the motion to dismiss filed by 
Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA”), ECF No. 84 (“MTD Brief”), BANA 
provides this notice of the recent decision in Hardin v. Bank of America, Case 
No. 2:22-cv-10023, 2022 WL 3568568 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 18, 2022), attached hereto 
as Exhibit A.  In Hardin, the district court dismissed with prejudice claims for 
violation of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (“EFTA”), negligence, breach of 
contract, breach of implied contract, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith 
and fair dealing, all of which arose out of BANA’s issuance and servicing of prepaid 
debit cards for unemployment benefits recipients in Michigan.  Those claims are also 
asserted, in nearly identical fashion, in In re: Bank of America California 
Unemployment Benefits Litigation (see ECF No. 72 (Master Consolidated 
Complaint) at ¶¶ 533-545 (alleging violations of EFTA), ¶¶ 585-602 (alleging 
negligence and negligent hiring), ¶¶ 603-610 (alleging breach of contract), ¶¶ 134-
140 (alleging breach of implied contract), ¶¶ 611-618 (alleging breach of implied 
covenant)).   
Given the similarities between the cases, BANA believes the Hardin decision 
is instructive on the issues pending before the Court, particularly BANA’s arguments 
for dismissal of the EFTA and contract-based claims (see MTD Brief at pp. 17-20 
(arguing EFTA claim should be dismissed); pp. 7-17 (arguing contract, implied 
contract, and implied covenant claims should be dismissed)).  If it would be helpful 
to the Court, BANA is happy to provide briefing on the applicability of the Hardin 
decision to the pending motion to dismiss.   
 
 
 
 
Date:  September 7, 2022
s/ James W. McGarry
James W. McGarry
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 108     Filed 09/07/22     PageID.899     Page 2
of 3

 
NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL 
AUTHORITY 
3 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the clerk of the 
court for the United States District Court for the Southern District of California by 
using the CM/ECF system on September 7, 2022.  I further certify that all participants 
in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the 
CM/ECF system.  I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and 
correct. 
Executed:  September 7, 2022
s/ James W. McGarry
 
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 108     Filed 09/07/22     PageID.900     Page 3
of 3

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.108.0.pdf

Size

305,947 bytes

SHA-256

f247d07adc0996d4d60f740286cb449572d06ab39f5758395e045d9a57f0f691

Our copy

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.108.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)