U.S. District Judge Wendy Berger for Middle Florida in Orlando granted AT&T’s motion to compel a plaintiff's SIM swap claims to arbitration and to stay the case pending the outcome of that arbitration, said her order Wednesday (docket 6:23-cv-00120). Berger accepted U.S. Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd's June report and recommendation (R&R), which recommended finding a connection between plaintiff Al Weiss’ claims regarding the way his customer data was protected and the customer service agreement with AT&T. Weiss objected to the R&R (see 2307110028) because it recommends compelling arbitration without finding a substantial relationship between his claims and the arbitration agreement, contrary to Florida law. “The R&R failed to address, much less find, the existence of a substantial relationship between Plaintiff’s claims and the Customer Service Agreement,” Weiss said. The case is stayed pending arbitration. Berger ordered AT&T to file a status report on arbitration proceedings on or before April 22.

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria for Northern California granted plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate seven fraud cases against Western Digital under In re: SanDisk SSDS Litigation, said his Wednesday order (docket 3:23-cv-04206) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Francisco. The cases involve allegedly defective SanDisk solid-state drives (see 2308240026). Class leadership motions must be filed within seven days, and a consolidated class action complaint is due within 21 days of the order establishing class leadership. Cases in the consolidated action are Krum v. Western Digital Technologies (docket 3:23-cv-04152), Perrin, et al. v. SanDisk (docket 5:23-cv-04201), Jafri v. SanDisk (docket 5:23-cv-04206), Pousa v. Western Digital Technologies (docket 3:23-cv-04281) Bax v. Western Digital (docket 5:23-cv-04543), Jackson v. Western Digital (docket 3:23-cv-04681) and Gary v. SanDisk (docket 3:23-cv-04815).

DOJ seeks an order under Section 3512 of Title 18 appointing Dennis Robinson, a criminal trial attorney in DOJ’s Office of International Affairs, as a commissioner to collect evidence requested by the public prosecutor’s office in Giessen, Germany, for an investigation into a "romance scam" fraud scheme over social media, said DOJ’s ex parte application Monday (docket 1:23-ml-02028) in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. German prosecutors allege that an unnamed victim, "an individual in Germany," met someone in July 2021 who identified himself as Darger Abbe Fisher on an online social media platform, said the application. Fisher and the victim communicated exclusively through social media, it said. Fisher claimed to be a U.S. soldier stationed in Yemen, it said. “Over the next several weeks, Fisher compelled the victim to believe that Fisher and the victim were in a romantic relationship,” it said. “At some point in the communication, Fisher informed the victim that Fisher required money to pay for Fisher’s daughter’s life saving surgery,” and convinced the victim to wire more than $34,000 to four separate U.S. bank accounts between September 2021 and May 2022, said the application. “To further the investigation,” German prosecutors asked U.S. authorities to obtain and forward them bank records as evidence to help identify the holders of the four U.S. bank accounts and the perpetrators of the fraud scheme, it said. The request came under a U.S.-Germany treaty that “obligates each party, upon request, to provide assistance to the other in criminal investigations, prosecutions, and related proceedings, including assistance in serving documents, obtaining testimony, statements, and records, and executing searches and seizures,” said the application. DOJ’s requested order appointing Robinson as commissioner is necessary to execute German prosecutors’ request, it said. The application is being made ex parte, "consistent with U.S. practice in its domestic criminal matters," it said.

A Texas entity, High Sharp, prepaid $19.1 million to a subsidiary of Semiconductor Manufacturing International Co., China’s largest chipmaker, to procure wafers for use in producing cryptocurrency “miners” during their peak demand in 2021, but never received the goods, alleged a fraud complaint Monday (docket 2:23-cv-08934) in U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles. A miner is a specialized computer designed for the single purpose of mining new cryptocurrencies “by solving complex mathematical puzzles,” said the complaint. Each time a puzzle is solved, the owner of the miner is rewarded with cryptocurrency, it said. The SMIC subsidiary and its officers “never intended to deliver any wafers,” said the complaint. They instead used the prepayment “to fund the manufacture and delivery of wafers to third parties after conducting a secret bidding war to fetch the highest price possible,” it said. High Sharp “entirely missed its bargained-for and intended opportunity,” because the cryptocurrency market “cooled during the time period” in which it discovered the defendants’ “intentional malfeasance,” it said. The complaint seeks restitution of the $19.1 million prepaid, plus “exemplary and punitive damages in a sum according to proof.”

Plaintiff Lisa Bodenburg’s fraud class action alleging that Apple shortchanged iCloud+ customers of 5 GB of cloud storage capacity a month (see 2308270001) is based on “an implausible and strained misinterpretation” of Apple’s “unambiguous and accurate” public iCloud+ disclosures, said Apple’s memorandum of points and authorities Friday (docket 5:23-cv-04409) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Jose in support of its motion to dismiss. Apple’s iCloud+ disclosures “unambiguously state the exact amount of storage customers receive at each tier with their iCloud+ subscription plan,” said its memorandum. Yet according to Bodenburg, customers should also receive an additional 5 GB of iCloud storage “on top of the clearly explained iCloud+ storage amounts a customer purchases,” it said. That contention should be rejected “because reasonable consumers reviewing the information about iCloud+ on Apple’s website understand that the storage amount listed is what is provided for a given subscription plan,” it said. Bodenburg’s argument also should be rejected "because it defies both common sense and the plain language of Apple’s public (and judicially noticeable) disclosures,” it said. Bodenburg’s claims under California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act and its Unfair Competition Law fail because reasonable consumers shouldn’t be “misled by Apple’s disclosures regarding the storage provided and features associated with iCloud+ subscription plans,” it said. Bodenburg’s attempt “to manufacture a fraud claim based on her far-fetched and counterintuitive interpretation of Apple’s public disclosures is unavailing and flawed,” it said.

The plaintiffs in the multidistrict litigation arising from Samsung’s summer 2022 data breach ask the court to ignore that the notice sent by Samsung, which they repeatedly cite and rely on in the complaint, “states plainly that Social Security numbers and credit or debit card information” weren’t exposed in the data breach, said Samsung’s reply Friday (docket 1:23-md-03055) in U.S. District Court for New Jersey in Camden in support of its Aug. 11 motion to dismiss (see 2308140053). The plaintiffs “fail to point to any well-pleaded factual allegations to explain why their disparate injuries are plausible,” it said. The plaintiffs are thus forced “to speculate as to facts not alleged, ignore the cases cited by Samsung, twist legal doctrines,” and ask the court “to abstain from ruling on key issues,” said Samsung’s reply. Recognizing these problems, the plaintiffs argue that their inability to plead a viable complaint “stems from the lack of discovery,” but this can’t “save” their complaint, it said.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court's Oct. 12 decision in Diaz v. One Technologies affirming the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction supports One Technologies’ Oct. 11 motion to dismiss plaintiff Joel Fink’s fraud complaint because the consumer credit information company isn’t subject to personal jurisdiction in California (see 2310120024), said the company’s statement Thursday (docket 3:23-cv-05086) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Francisco. Fink alleges One Technologies sent him at least 73 unsolicited and unlawful spam emails in violation of Section 17529.5 of the California Business and Professional Code (see 2310050001).

Eighteen tagalong actions in In re: MOVEit Customer Data Security Breach Litigation were transferred Wednesday to U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs for Massachusetts for pretrial consolidation, said the U.S. Panel on Multidistrict Litigation’s (JPML) conditional transfer order (CTO-6) (docket 3083). The transmittal of the order will be stayed seven days from entry in the court. If any party files a notice of opposition within the seven-day period, the stay will be continued until further order of the JPML, said the order. Also Wednesday, CTO-2 was finalized when no notices of opposition were filed in either of the two cases, Kennedy v. Genworth Financial or Bailey v. Genworth Financial. In addition, counsel for defendant TMG Health notified the JPML Wednesday of two potential tagalong actions in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania: Maria Izbicki v. TMG Health and Tama Herman v. TMG Health. Since Oct. 4, when the JPML transferred five cases to Massachusetts federal court, 66 actions have been transferred to the district under Judge Burroughs.

U.S. District Judge Mary Scriven granted the FTC and Florida Department of Legal Affairs’ unopposed motion to stay proceedings (see 2310180022) in a fraud case against Global E-Trading, Gary Cardone and Monica Eaton, said a text-only order (docket 8:23-cv-00796) Thursday in U.S. District Court for Middle Florida in Tampa. The case is stayed and administratively closed for 45 days, after which the parties will file a joint status report advising the court whether they have reached a settlement or if the case needs to be reopened, said the order. The April complaint alleges Cardone and Eaton, owners of Global E-Trading, doing business as Chargebacks911, used “multiple unfair techniques” to prevent consumers from winning chargeback disputes over unwanted, fraudulent or incorrect credit card charges.

U.S. District Judge Stephen Bough granted plaintiff Michelle Blankenship and defendant T-Mobile Central’s stipulation Monday (see 2310170013) for dismissal Tuesday, said a text-only order (docket 4:23-cv-00561) in U.S. District Court for Western Missouri in Kansas City. The parties submitted a joint stipulation of dismissal without prejudice. After granting the dismissal without prejudice Tuesday, Bough filed another notice that the filing was in error and ordered the case dismissed with prejudice. Blankenship’s August complaint alleged T-Mobile collected from customers a “city license” or “utility tax” it wasn’t authorized to collect (see 2308100031). In its September motion to dismiss, T-Mobile said Blankenship’s case was “the exact same lawsuit” she filed last year in which a state court compelled her claims to arbitration (see 2309130009). Blankenship asserted two counts against T-Mobile, for unjust enrichment, and for alleged violations of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. “Both claims are governed by a five-year limitations period that long ago expired," said T-Mobile's motion to dismiss. The sort of “gamesmanship” and waste of judicial resources being practiced by Blankenship and her attorneys have "long been disallowed,” it said.