Kelley v. AW Distributing, Inc.
- Jeffrey White
- 4:20-cv-06942
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Kelley v. AW Distributing, Inc., Judge White ordered plaintiffs to explain their standing to pursue California unfair-competition and false-advertising claims.
The plaintiffs’ claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law were subject to the court’s order requiring the plaintiffs to explain their standing. The defendants were affected because the court directed the plaintiffs to address whether those claims should remain in the case.
What happened
In Kelley v. AW Distributing, Inc., the plaintiffs brought claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law. The court noted that those laws provide restitution and injunctive relief, but not damages.
The court said it was not clear whether the plaintiffs had constitutional standing to pursue those claims. Standing is the legal requirement that a person show a sufficient connection to the dispute and the requested relief.
Judge Jeffrey White ordered the plaintiffs to explain in writing by June 22, 2022, why the claims should not be dismissed for lack of standing. The order did not itself dismiss the claims.
The detailed version
- Kelley v. AW Distributing, Inc. · No. 4:20-cv-06942
- Jeffrey White
- June 8, 2022
Background
Brian Kelley and other plaintiffs asserted claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law against AW Distributing, Inc., and other defendants. The opinion states that these laws allow restitution and injunctive relief, but not damages. It also states that a plaintiff seeking relief under either law must show that the defendant’s conduct caused the plaintiff to lose money or property.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that Article III standing is jurisdictional, meaning it concerns the federal court’s authority to hear the dispute. A plaintiff must establish standing for each claim and each type of relief sought. The court stated that it was not evident that the plaintiffs had standing to pursue their claims.
Order
The court ordered the plaintiffs to show cause in writing, no later than June 22, 2022, why the claims should not be dismissed for lack of standing. This was an order requiring an explanation; the opinion did not state that the claims were dismissed. The order was signed by Judge Jeffrey White and dated June 8, 2022.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.