A recent 5th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court ruling relied on the same line of cases that Amazon and other defendants cited in support of their motions to dismiss the FTC’s case alleging violation of the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act, said defendants’ filing (docket 2:23-cv-00932) Monday in U.S. District Court for Western Washington in Seattle. In their notice of supplemental authority relating to their motions to dismiss the FTC's amended complaint, the defendants cited the 5th Circuit’s Jan. 8 ruling in Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. EOX Holdings, in which the court reversed a civil-liability finding in favor of the plaintiff because “the Defendants lacked fair notice of the CFTC’s unprecedented interpretation” of a CFTC rule, said the notice. In that case, the CFTC argued that the rule’s “‘controlling plain language’ provided ‘fair notice’ to the public,” the notice said. The 5th Circuit reversed a lower court's ruling, holding that the rule was “at best ambiguous” and “did not give fair notice to the Defendants absent further guidance from the FTC.” The EOX case is relevant to arguments in Amazon’s motion that “fair notice” standards apply only “if a court ‘must defer to an agency interpretation of a statute or regulation’ ... or the agency itself is acting as the adjudicator,” the notice said. The FTC alleges Amazon used “manipulative, coercive, or deceptive user-interface designs,” or dark patterns, to trick consumers into enrolling in automatically renewing Prime subscriptions, it said. The company “knowingly complicated” the Prime cancellation process, said the complaint.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Steven Tiscione for Eastern New York in Central Islip is deferring a ruling on Northwell Health’s Jan. 18 motion to stay plaintiff Amanda Marconi’s data breach case, and instead is scheduling a dial-in hearing on the motion for Jan. 30 at 10:30 a.m., said Tiscione’s text-only order Monday (docket 2:23-cv-08638). Northwell and its co-defendant, Perry Johnson & Associates (PJ&A), are requesting the stay while a motion for centralization and consolidation encompassing Marconi’s case and nearly 40 other actions is pending before the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. A JPML hearing on the motion is scheduled for Thursday. The various complaints allege that malicious actors accessed the personal records of 3.9 million current and former Northwell patients between March 27 and May 2, but that Northwell and its record-keeping vendor, PJ&A, kept the data breach hidden from the public until Nov. 3 (see 2311210005).

U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson for Northern California in San Francisco granted defendant Apple and plaintiff Lisa Bodenburg's stipulation to move Bodenburg’s iCloud+ fraud case to private mediation, said Thompson’s signed order Friday (docket 3:23-cv-04409). Bodenburg alleges that Apple delivers iCloud+ subscribers 5 GB less monthly cloud-storage capacity than they pay for (see 2308270001).

Amazon seeks a clerk’s entry of default against defendant Elly Infotech for not having served “any responsive pleading or requested additional time to serve a responsive pleading” to Amazon’s Nov. 9 complaint, said Amazon’s request Thursday (docket 2:23-cv-02353) in U.S. District Court for Arizona in Phoenix. Elly Infotech was one of multiple defendants that Amazon sued in three federal courts on a single day. It seeks to halt separate sets of alleged fraudsters from running impersonation scams that dupe consumers into buying fake Amazon support services for activating Prime Video on their devices (see 2311120001).

Plaintiff Zuania Vazquez-Padilla and defendant Cognizant Technology Solutions want U.S. District Judge Thomas Barber for Middle Florida in Tampa to transfer their case to Judge Mary Scriven, also in Middle Florida, said their joint motion Tuesday (docket 8:23-cv-02607). Scriven presides over an earlier-filed action where Vazquez-Padilla initially asserted the same claims. Proceeding under different judges “presents the probability of inefficiency and inconsistency,” said their motion. Vazquez-Padilla’s lawsuit arises out of the litigation, Aguilo et al. v. Cognizant (docket 8:21-cv-002054), currently pending before Scriven, it said. Vazquez-Padilla was one of about 150 individual plaintiffs in Aguilo, who claimed they had been employed by Cognizant as content moderators to review and remove material posted to social media platforms that violated their terms of use, it said. The plaintiffs in Aguilo alleged that Cognizant fraudulently misrepresented the nature of the content moderator job during the hiring and training process, causing each of them to suffer certain psychological harms, it said. Scriven entered a dismissal order Sept. 15, directing remaining plaintiffs who elected to proceed with their litigation to file individual lawsuits, “properly pleading their fraudulent misrepresentation claims,” and to do so no later than Nov. 14, said the motion. Fourteen plaintiffs did so, including Vazquez-Padilla (see 2311150021), it said. Four of the cases are pending before Scriven, and Cognizant is filing similar motions to transfer all the cases to her, it said.

Match Group “failed to place users on reasonable or inquiry notice of the terms of its online agreements,” and therefore its sign-in wrap agreement “is insufficient to bind” Sylvia Ciapinska to arbitration, said the plaintiff Wednesday in a memorandum of law (docket 2:23-cv-23115) opposing Match’s motion to compel arbitration or, in the alternative, to transfer the case to the Northern District of Texas. Ciapinska sued Tinder and parent company Match after another Tinder user allegedly misappropriated her likeness (see 2312180037). She alleges Match falsely advertised Tinder’s photo verification process, leading her and class members to believe that such misappropriation wouldn’t be possible, it said. In its December motion to compel (see 2312220030), Match said Ciapinska agreed to arbitrate her claims against Match, that any disputes concerning arbitrability of claims must be submitted to an arbitrator for resolution, and “to litigate any purportedly non-arbitrable claims against Match in Dallas County, Texas.” In the alternative to arbitration, Match seeks a transfer of the case to the U.S. District Court for Northern Texas. Match seeks to deprive its users “of their time-honored and constitutionally guaranteed right to a jury trial through the use of a 'Sign-in Wrap' agreement, even though it repeatedly mischaracterizes the purported 'agreement' as a 'clickwrap'” in its motion to compel, said the memorandum. Through its design and layout, Match failed to put users on notice of the terms of its online agreements, it said. Whether Ciapinska’s claims are arbitrable is for the court, not an arbitrator, to decide, said the memorandum. Should the court find that Match’s arbitration provision is enforceable, which Ciapinska believes it is not, its claims don’t fall within the scope of the language of that provision “and therefore should not be compelled to arbitration,” it said. And should the court find that Ciapinska agreed to Match’s terms of use, “which she did not,” the court should refuse to enforce the forum-selection clause, the memorandum said.

Amazon removed a fraud case involving its policy on negative reviews from Los Angeles County Superior Court to U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles, said its notice of removal Wednesday (docket 2:24-cv-00240). The Dec. 1 complaint (see 2312050014), which brings claims under the California code and Unfair Competition Law, alleges Amazon’s conditions of use governing its website and mobile app violated California Civil Code section 1670.8 by “purportedly including a provision that limits consumers’ use of Amazon’s 'trademarked brand names,'” said the notice. Plaintiff Barbara Trevino alleges visitors to Amazon’s platforms are informed they must agree to its conditions of use as a precondition to using and benefiting from the platforms, the complaint said. The “far reaching” conditions require users to agree on behalf of themselves and household members who use any service under their account, it said. The conditions stifle Californians’ right to free speech, their right to receive lawful discourse and to remain informed, the complaint said. Amazon’s conditions hyperlink to a “non-exhaustive list” of trade names that users are prohibited from commenting on, including Amazon Prime, Ring, Whole Foods, Woot and Zappos, the complaint said. Amazon’s business practice “is unlawful and is intended to unilaterally protect” its public image and “maximize commercial profits at the expense of the public’s right to make informed decisions as consumers,” it said. Trevino seeks damages, statutory damages, restitution, injunctive and declaratory relief, plus attorneys’ fees. The plaintiff seeks to represent a putative class of California residents who “visited, used, or completed transactions” in Amazon’s store and agreed to its conditions of use.

U.S. District Judge David Godbey for Northern Texas in Dallas consolidated 20 class actions against Mr. Cooper Group, a mortgage servicing company, said his signed order Tuesday (docket 3:23-CV-02453). Plaintiffs in the various cases all allege that the company has been less than transparent about the scope and gravity of the data breach it incurred and began informing customers about in early November.

Four days after filing a shareholder derivative class action against Verizon CEO Hans Vestberg and 15 current and former board members for allegedly covering up their knowledge of Verizon’s abandoned toxic lead-laden telecom cables (see 2401050001), plaintiff Wade Sarver voluntarily dismissed his claims against all the defendants without prejudice, said his notice of dismissal Monday (docket 3:24-cv-00063) in U.S. District Court for New Jersey in Trenton. No defendant has filed an answer or moved for summary judgment, said the notice. Neither Sarver nor his counsel, Laurence Rosen of the Rosen Law Firm, “has received or will receive directly or indirectly any consideration for the dismissal,” it said. Rosen is the same attorney who previously helped bring shareholder derivative class actions against top AT&T and Verizon executives and board members, also for allegedly concealing what they knew about the abandoned lead cables (see 2308020046).

Plaintiff Dennis DePalma and Verizon reached a settlement to resolve all of DePalma’s SIM-swap claims against Verizon, said their joint notice of settlement Friday (docket 2:23-cv-22318) in U.S. District Court for New Jersey in Newark. The parties are in the process of satisfying the terms of a confidential settlement agreement, and expect to file a request for dismissal under Rule 41.1(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by March 5, said the notice. In light of the pending settlement, the parties ask that the court vacate all pending deadlines and enter a 60-day order administratively terminating the action, it said. DePalma alleged he became a victim of cryptocurrency fraud March 21 when a John Doe “scammer” stole nearly $34,000 from his Coinbase account through a SIM swap at a Verizon store in Woodbury, Minnesota, that Verizon should have prevented (see 2311140003).