Bui v. Mercedes-Benz U.S.A., LLC

Background

Tiffany Bui bought a 2021 Mercedes-Benz C300 with a written warranty in December 2020. She alleged that the car had serious defects involving the powertrain system, electrical system, and engine. In March 2023, she took the car to a dealership because the check-engine light was on and the car was in limp mode. The dealership verified her concerns and performed warranty repairs, but Bui alleged that the repairs did not properly repair the car. About a week later, she returned for electrical concerns. About two months after that, she returned because the check-engine light had come on again and the car lacked acceleration. The dealership again verified her concerns and performed warranty repairs.

Bui filed this action on October 9, 2023. She asserted claims for breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, and violation of California Civil Code section 1793.2(b). Mercedes-Benz moved to dismiss all three claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which allows dismissal when a complaint does not adequately state a claim for relief.

Court’s Analysis

Express warranty claim. The court held that Bui did not provide enough detail to plausibly allege that Mercedes-Benz failed to repair a particular defect after a reasonable number of attempts. Although she described three repair visits, the complaint did not identify the specific defect addressed at each visit or make clear that the visits concerned the same defect. The court also noted that, even if the repeated check-engine-light complaint involved the same defect, Bui did not allege that the vehicle remained unrepaired after the June visit. The court dismissed the express warranty claim with leave to amend.

Implied warranty claim. The court explained that, under the California Song-Beverly Act, the implied warranty has a limited duration. The parties disputed whether a defect must show symptoms during that period or whether it is enough for the defect to have existed at the time of sale. The court did not resolve that dispute because Bui’s allegations were insufficient under either approach. Her assertion that one or more unspecified vehicle systems or components were defective when the car was sold was conclusory and did not identify the specific problems that allegedly existed in December 2020. The court dismissed the implied warranty claim with leave to amend.

Section 1793.2(b) claim. California Civil Code section 1793.2(b) requires repair service to begin within a reasonable time and requires the goods to be repaired within 30 days. The court found that Bui did not state how long it took the dealership to begin or complete any of the identified repairs. Without those time allegations, the court dismissed this claim with leave to amend.

Disposition

Judge P. Casey Pitts granted Mercedes-Benz U.S.A., LLC’s motion to dismiss. Each of Bui’s three claims was dismissed with leave to amend. The court ordered that an amended complaint be filed by April 19, 2024.