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).

The district court abused its discretion in denying pro se plaintiff-appellant Ganiyu Jaiyeola injunctive relief to stop Apple, AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon from advertising that the iPhone 15 Pro is a titanium phone by disregarding “standing precedents” on false advertising in California, said Jaiyeola’s opening brief Friday in his 9th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court appeal to reverse the district court’s decision. The 9th Circuit, in a Dec. 14 order, also denied Jaiyeola’s emergency motion for injunctive relief to enjoin the iPhone 15 Pro titanium advertising at the peak of the holiday shopping season (see 2312150041). Jaiyeola has a 1995 doctorate in materials science from the University of Connecticut, and worked as a metallurgist for Apple for 18 months through Aug. 8, said his brief. There’s “a lot more” aluminum alloy than titanium alloy in the iPhone 15 Pro, it said. Considering all the alloys in the iPhone 15 Pro, aluminum “has the largest material surface area,” it said. Titanium is highly valued for its strength-to-weight ratio and corrosion resistance, it said. But after processing, titanium is more than 40 times more expensive than the “corresponding” stainless steel components of the iPhone 15 Pro and nearly 20 times more expensive than the aluminum components, it said. Jaiyeola has Article III standing to bring his claims, said his brief.

Law firm Bursor & Fisher, which alleged in a Dec. 22 class action on behalf of plaintiff Shane Mannion that Fandango was “nickel and diming” moviegoers with its hidden per-ticket “convenience fees” (see 2312270004), asserted nearly identical allegations in a new class action Friday against AMC Theatres on behalf of plaintiff Vivian Picciotti. Because New York "is a busy place," and because these fees are "flashed" only after moviegoers select their seats, AMC “can plausibly put its customers on a shot clock and tell them they need to decide quick,” because AMC can’t hold their seats open forever, said the complaint (docket 1:24-cv-00110) in U.S. District Court for Southern New York in Manhattan. This “cheap trick” has enabled AMC “to swindle substantial sums of money from its customers,” in violation of the New York Arts and Cultural Affairs Law, it said. AMC's convenience fee is $2.19 per ticket, compared with $1.89 at Fandango, said the complaint. New York resident Picciotti seeks relief individually and on behalf of all other AMC ticket purchasers for film screenings in New York for actual and statutory damages, reasonable attorneys’ costs and fees and injunctive relief, it said.

A case alleging violations of the California Business & Professions Code's anti-spam provisions was dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, said an order (docket 1:23-cv-01287) signed Thursday by U.S. District Judge Robert Jonker for Western Michigan in Grand Rapids. The plaintiffs are preparing to refile the action in state court, it said. Plaintiffs Mason Farrell, Tanisha Carter, William Greenberg, Kristina Kirby, Deidre Love and Vanessa Powers, all California residents, alleged Hillsdale College and its third-party publisher affiliates, advertised in more than 1,400 unlawful, unsolicited commercial email advertisements promoting the liberal arts college’s website, goods and services. The affiliate senders took “active steps to conceal their identities” when they registered the domain names they used to send or facilitate the sending of the spams at issue, “and they are liable for their own wrongful acts,” the complaint said. Plaintiffs don’t know the true names or legal capacities of defendants designated as Does 1-1,000, who operate various domain names associated with “either sending or hyperlinking from the spams at issue" that promoted Hillsdale, Michigan, college and its website, goods and services, the complaint said. In addition to Hillsdale, the suit named defendants Pop Acta Media, O2M Digital, AOC Alerts, Backing America Now, Build Our Movement, Conservative Intel, Lead America 24, Patriot and Free, Pence News and Does 1-1,000. Most of the affiliate defendants are associated with conservative political messaging.

A stipulation of dismissal is “self-effectuating” without the need for a court order, and Cresa Global v. Twitter and X Corp. is dismissed with prejudice by action of the parties’ joint stipulation of dismissal Sunday (docket 3:23-cv-04642), said a text-only notice Wedneday in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Francisco. Each party will bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees. Real estate firm Cresa alleged in a September complaint that a drop in revenue from advertisers alienated by X owner Elon Musk’s “moderation decisions” after he bought Twitter caused “extreme belt-tightening” that led the company to stop paying several vendors whose services it was using (see 2309120066).

Citibank removed to U.S. District Court for Southern New York in Manhattan Friday a SIM-swap complaint (docket 1:23-cv-11294) filed Nov. 20 in New York Supreme Court in which plaintiff Brian Jones accuses Citibank and T-Mobile of breach of contract and negligence. The New York resident alleges T-Mobile allowed individuals to switch his service and SIM card to an unauthorized cellphone, said the complaint. The individuals accomplished their fraud without providing identification as they bought the new cellphone with cash and were not required to meet T-Mobile’s “own internal procedures,” it said. Citibank then allowed them to use the newly absconded PIN to withdraw roughly $100,000 from Jones’ account without properly identifying them, it said. The complaint seeks punitive damages against T-Mobile and Citibank, plus recovery of the stolen funds.

FloatMe and co-founders Joshua Sanchez and Ryan Cleary run a personal finance mobile app that promises consumers who live paycheck to paycheck short-term cash advances if they enroll in a $1.99 monthly membership plan, but they fail to deliver on those promises, alleged the FTC's complaint Tuesday (docket 5:24-cv-00001) in U.S. District Court for Western Texas in San Antonio. Since launching the app in 2019, FloatMe, Sanchez and Cleary have used “misrepresentations” to induce consumers to enroll in a subscription plan, said the complaint. FloatMe advertises that paying consumers can receive cash advances of up to $50 instantly on request, and that consumers can receive that amount immediately after signing up. “But consumers can actually receive only $20, at most,” it said. FloatMe also tells consumers that their cash advance limit will increase over time under an “automated process,” but in fact there’s no such process, “and the vast majority of consumers never receive increases,” it said. FloatMe also repeatedly charges consumers for services without consent, said the complaint. Many consumers have been double-charged for fees, or were charged before the agreed-on repayment date or after canceling their accounts, it said. When consumers try to cancel their memberships, FloatMe “requires them to navigate faulty cancelation mechanisms that are steeped with friction and dark patterns designed to thwart consumers’ attempts to cancel,” it said. The complaint seeks monetary damages and other relief, plus a permanent injunction to prevent future violations of the FTC Act, the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.

SolarWinds’ opening brief and motion to dismiss the SEC’s securities fraud complaint is due Jan. 26, said an order signed Wednesday (docket 1:23-cv-09518) by U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer for Southern New York in Manhattan. Feb. 2 is the deadline for the filing of any amicus briefs in support of the motion to dismiss, said the order. Engelmayer will likely hear oral argument on the motion to dismiss, “on a date to be determined,” it said. The SEC’s 10-count Oct. 30 complaint alleges that SolarWinds and Timothy Brown, its chief information security officer, defrauded investors through misstatements, omissions and schemes that concealed the company’s poor cybersecurity practices in the run-up to the Russian government's Sunburst attack in December 2020 (see 2310310041).

SiriusXM agrees with plaintiff-appellants Ayana Stevenson, David Ambrose and Lisa Ramirez that mediation in their fraud appeal “would likely not be productive” (see 2312130038), said the company’s mediation questionnaire Wednesday (docket 23-4018) at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The plaintiffs allege SiriusXM charges higher prices for its music plans than it advertises, and they’re appealing the district court’s granting of SiriusXM’s motion to compel their claims to arbitration. SiriusXM, “in an abundance of caution,” filed a cross-appeal “to preserve its ability to argue” that the U.S. District Court for Northern California should have stayed the litigation pending the outcome of the arbitration rather than dismissing the case, said the questionnaire. It also wants to reserve the right to argue that “the availability of public injunctive relief is a question the parties delegated to the arbitrator to decide,” it said.

For more than a year Fandango Media has been “nickel and diming” moviegoers on its website, imposing a $1.89 per ticket “convenience fee” at checkout after consumers click through various screens required to make a purchase, alleged Shane Mannion’s class action Friday (docket 1:23-cv-11150) in U.S. District Court for Southern New York in Manhattan. By not displaying the full ticket price upfront, as the New York Arts and Cultural Affairs Law requires, Fandango's “cheap trick” has enabled it “to swindle substantial sums of money" from customers, the complaint alleged. Fandango’s convenience fees “can quickly add up,” the complaint added. For a family of four, Fandango tacks on an extra $7.56 at the end of the purchase process, it said. That’s “roughly equivalent to the cost of a bucket of popcorn,” it said. The “checkout flow” and the disclosures Fandango presents to consumers are the same whether they buy tickets via the Fandango website or through mobile apps, it said. The complaint seeks restitution, compensatory and statutory damages and injunctive relief. in violation of the New York Arts and Cultural Affairs Law,