Mail Returned as Undeliverable re 148 Order on Motion for Leave to File Document.… — Bofa Ca Unemployment (Dkt. 168)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California · No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB · Doc. 168 · 2023-08-08 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
OFFICE OF THE CLERK 
333 WEST BROADWAY, SUITE 420 
SAN DIEGO, CAUFORN/A92101 
OFFICIAL BUS/NESS 
• .,.. ""c,. r Al ... .. ~,·,1J-.t Io ...... _..., 
LELA33 3 
941054113-IN 
CHYE333 
941054113-IN 
009 08/08/2~, 
009 08/08/2 3 
RECEIVED 
I, 1
1
··11
1
111II
11
••11
11·1111I,·111, I 1, I II 11, 1 ··I, 1 fl 111' I I ;!Fr· 1 I 
0 2023 I 
Eitche/1 Chyette 
3 
. . . 
. "'" ,. '""'""·""'"' .. 
I AUG 
eland Parach1ni Steinberg Matzgert and Mj,l~'ii::.,., ,,.,..,,""'""~--
""l!AK 'us DISTRICTCOU~1NIA 
33 Market 
AUG ~ 0 2bl3 
·-
San Francisc 
ooutiAN oisTa,cr OF CALIFoepurv uite 2 700 
N r x r E 
s s s 
, e 10 • • 
• 1 0 • / 12 ; 2, 
;; :{•0092 2 47 2 2 2 m2 s0 
RETUiN 
TO SENDER 
-,.., ..... . -
\i' /'"'f.L 
VACANT 
UNABL E TO ~OR WARD 
~14 i ,si ::t:a:.t~::EB 0:0~ 
BC: 
92101380620 
*0204 -0 1910 - 02~44 
I'' I j I; I: 1
1
1;' I' I I' ' i 'iii i; I' i I'/ I I/''' j /I'; I/ iii j' j I I' I;: jj:' •fi 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 168     Filed 08/30/23     PageID.1932     Page 1
of 4

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
1 1 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
IN RE: BANK OF AMERICA 
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT 
BENEFITS LITIGATION 
Case No.: 21-md-2992-LAB-MSB 
ORDER: 
1) GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE 
MOTION FOR 
RECONSIDERATION, 
(Dkt. 141 ); and 
2) SETTING BRIEFING 
SCHEDULE 
19 
Plaintiffs filed an Ex Parte Application for Leave to File a Motion for 
20 
Reconsideration ("Application"). (0kt. 141 ). Plaintiffs seek leave to file a motion 
21 
for reconsideration of the Court's May 25, 2023 Order dismissing with prejudice 
22 
their claims under California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL"), Bus. & Prof. Code 
23 
§§ 17200 et seq. (0kt. 126 at 31-33). Plaintiffs' Application is unopposed. 
24 
The Court's May 25 Order relied on the Ninth Circuit's decision in Sonner v. 
25 
Premier Nutrition Corp., which held that a plaintiff "must establish that she lacks 
26 
an adequate remedy at law before securing equitable restitution for past harm 
27 
under the UCL." 971 F.3d 834, 844 (9th Cir. 2020). Applying Sonner to Plaintiffs' 
28 
claims, the Court found that Plaintiffs failed to state a claim under the UCL 
21-md-2992-LAB-MSB 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 168     Filed 08/30/23     PageID.1933     Page 2
of 4

1 because they "plead[ed] claims for equitable relief under the UCL but [didn't] 
2 
allege inadequate legal remedies." (See Dkt. 126 at 33). The Court dismissed 
3 
Plaintiffs' UCL claims with prejudice. (Id.). 
4 
Before a party may file a motion for reconsideration, the party must first 
5 
obtain leave of Court. See Standing Order in Civil Cases 3( e ). The Court will grant 
6 
leave to file a motion for reconsideration only if the moving party can show: 
7 "(1) there is new evidence; or (2) a change in controlling law; or (3) the Court 
8 committed clear error in making the earlier ruling." 1 Id. 
9 
Plaintiffs argue the Court made four clear errors of law when dismissing their 
10 
UCL claims with prejudice: 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
(1) 
overlooking 
that 
Plaintiffs' 
UCL 
claim 
sought 
prospective injunctive relief based on future irreparable 
harms for which no legal remedies exist; (2) overlooking 
that Plaintiffs' UCL claim alleged that the Bank's 
challenged 
practices, 
even 
if 
not 
"unlawful," 
are 
nonetheless actionable under the UCL as "unfair' 
practices, for which no legal remedies are available; 
(3) dismissing the UCL claim without leave to amend even 
though, if amendment were permitted, Plaintiffs could 
allege inadequate legal remedies; and (4) dismissing the 
UCL claim with prejudice to Plaintiffs' ability to refile that 
claim in state court, which is contrary to Ninth Circuit 
precedent governing dismissals for lack of equitable 
jurisdiction. 
21 
(Dkt. 141 at 1 (emphasis in original) (internal citations omitted)). 
22 
II 
23 II 
24 II 
25 
26 
1 The undersigned judge's Standing Order in Civil Cases also requires the moving 
27 
party to file their application for leave within 28 days of the order sought to be 
reconsidered and to file a declaration with any such application, as required by 
28 
Civil Local Rule 7.1 (i). Plaintiffs' Application satisfies both requirements. 
2 
21-md-2992-LAB-MSB 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 168     Filed 08/30/23     PageID.1934     Page 3
of 4

1 
The Court has carefully read its May 25 Order, (Dkt. 126), and Plaintiffs' 
2 Application, (Dkt. 141 ), and finds the May 25 Order didn't adequately address: 
3 
(1) the distinction between the prospective injunctive relief sought by the MCC 
4 
and the "equitable restitution for past harm" sought in Sonner, 971 F.3d at 844; 
5 
(2) the availability of legal remedies for Defendant Bank of America, N.A.'s 
6 
("BANA") allegedly "unfair" practices; (3) whether the MCC's UCL claim should 
7 
have been dismissed with leave to amend; and (4) whether Ninth Circuit 
8 
precedent requires dismissals for lack of equitable jurisdiction be without 
9 
prejudice. 
10 
Plaintiffs' Application is GRANTED, and the Court ORDERS as follows: 
11 
1) 
Plaintiffs may file their motion for reconsideration on or before 
12 
August 7, 2023. Plaintiffs' brief supporting their motion must not 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
exceed 20 pages. 
2) 
BANA may file an opposition to Plaintiffs' motion on or before August 
14, 2023. BANA's opposition must not exceed 20 pages. 
3) 
Plaintiffs may file a reply to any opposition on or before August 21, 
2023. Plaintiffs' reply must not exceed 10 pages. 
4) 
The Court sets August 28, 2023 at 11 :30 a.m. as a hearing date for 
Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
21 
Dated: August 1, 2023 
22 
23 
United States District Judge 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
3 
21-md-2992-LAB-MSB 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 168     Filed 08/30/23     PageID.1935     Page 4
of 4

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.168.0.pdf

Size

88,357 bytes

SHA-256

2416ef608e30e6875d0557174cb30150869e22e62c1a708c4ebf998d3f369833

Our copy

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.168.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)