Order Directing Parties to Submit Supplemental Briefing — In re BofA Unemployment Litigation (Dkt. 264)

Summary

An order directing supplemental briefing on the plaintiffs' pending motion for reconsideration in In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation, Case No. 21MD2992-GPC(MSB), U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, dated and filed April 16, 2024 as Document 264 (3 pages). It recounts that on May 25, 2023, the court dismissed the Unfair Competition Law claim with prejudice for failure to allege inadequate legal remedies, and that the amended complaint re-pleaded the claim seeking prospective injunctive relief. On April 3, 2024, the court dissolved the Yick preliminary injunction after EDD ended its contract with the bank and directed it to close cardholders' accounts. The parties must file briefs of no more than 3 pages by April 26, 2024 on whether the UCL claim for prospective injunctive relief is still viable.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

1 
21MD2992-GPC(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
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
IN RE: BANK OF AMERICA 
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT 
BENEFITS LITIGATION, 
 
 Case No.:  21MD2992-GPC(MSB) 
 
ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO 
SUBMIT SUPPLEMENTAL 
BRIEFING ON PENDING MOTION 
FOR RECONSIDERATION 
 
 
This multi-district litigation was transferred to the undersigned judge on April 8, 
2021.  (Dkt. No. 261.)   
On August 17, 2021, Plaintffs filed a Master Consolidated Complaint (“MCC”) 
that included a claim under California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Business and 
Professions Codes sections 17200 et seq., seeking restitution, disgorgement and 
prospective injunctive relief against Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA” or  
“Bank”).  (Dkt. No. 72, MCC ¶ 584.)  On May 25, 2023, the Court granted in part and 
denied in part Defendant’s motion to dismiss the MCC.  (Dkt. No. 126.)  On the UCL 
claim, the Court granted dismissal with prejudice because Plaintiffs failed to allege 
inadequate legal remedies.  (Dkt. No. 126 at 31-33.1)  On June 13, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a 
 
1 Page numbers are based on the CM/ECF pagination.   
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 264     Filed 04/16/24     PageID.2550     Page 1
of 3

 
2 
21MD2992-GPC(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
First Amended Master Consolidated Complaint (“FAMCC”) alleging a claim under the 
UCL claiming that “Class Representative Plaintiffs’ legal remedies are inadequate to 
prevent future harm from the Bank’s unlawful and unfair conduct that is the subject of 
this Complaint, and that is or would be ongoing but for the preliminary injunction the 
consolidated Yick plaintiffs obtained in June 2021.”  (Dkt. No. 136, FAMCC ¶ 285.)  It 
seeks prospective injunctive relief “(a) prohibiting the Bank from continuing its unfair 
and unlawful business practices, and (b) requiring the Bank to take reasonable measures 
to prevent future unauthorized use of EDD Debit Cards and Accounts, and requiring the 
Bank to ensure timely and adequate processing of Cardholders’ claims requiring 
unauthorized and fraudulent use of their Cards or Accounts.”  (Id. ¶ 584.)   
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ fully briefed motion for reconsideration, 
filed on August 7, 2023, of the Court’s order granting dismissal of the UCL claim with 
prejudice arguing, inter alia, that they plead legal remedies would be inadequate for 
future irreparable harms seeking prospective injunctive relief.  (Dkt. Nos. 151, 158, 161.)   
Recently, on April 3, 2024, the Court granted BANA’s motion to dissolve the 
preliminary injunction issued in the member case of Yick v. Bank of America, N.A., Case 
No. 21-cv-1092, Dkt. No. 225, because the California Employment Development 
Department (“EDD”) terminated its longstanding contract with BANA and stopped 
funding any benefits through BANA’s prepaid debit cards, directed BANA to close 
cardholders’ existing EDD debit card accounts, and required BANA to provide notice to 
each affected cardholder and inform those with an existing balance as of April 30, 2024 
how to recover the funds before they escheat to the state. (See Dkt. Nos. 225-1, 248).   
  
 
In light of the dissolution of the preliminary injunction and the termination of the 
contract between EDD and BANA, the parties shall file a supplemental brief, no longer  
/ / / 
/ / / 
/ / / 
/ / / 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 264     Filed 04/16/24     PageID.2551     Page 2
of 3

 
3 
21MD2992-GPC(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
than 3 pages, whether the UCL claim seeking prospective injunctive relief is still viable 
on or before April 26, 2024.   
 
IT IS SO ORDERED.   
Dated:  April 16, 2024 
 
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 264     Filed 04/16/24     PageID.2552     Page 3
of 3

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.264.0.pdf

Size

135,127 bytes

SHA-256

cb309a22ff407d050c58f93af3c030ab04063b4ca863b7f6d452f046df646059

Our copy

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.264.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)