Torres v. Botanic Tonics, LLC

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROMULO TORRES, et al., Case No. 23-cv-01460-VC

Plaintiffs, ORDER CERTIFYING APPEAL OF v. ORDER DENYING 7-ELEVEN'S MOTION TO DISMISS BOTANIC TONICS, LLC, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 86 Defendants.

7-Eleven’s motion for certification under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(B) of the Court’s Order Denying 7-Eleven’s Motion to Dismiss is granted. The statutory requirements are met. The Order interprets the standard for liability under the unfair-practices prong of California’s Unfair Competition Law, and, in doing so, also interprets the Ninth Circuit’s holding in Hodsdon v. Mars, Inc., 891 F.3d 857, 867 (9th Cir. 2018). As the Order notes, other district courts have arguably taken a different view of certain language in Hodsdon—a view that aligns with 7- Eleven’s interpretation. Moreover, in a nonprecedential memorandum disposition from around the same time as this Court’s Order, the Ninth Circuit repeated the language from Hodsdon that 7-Eleven relies on. In re Intel Corp. CPU Marketing, Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., No. 22-35652. 2023 WL 7211394, at *2 (9th Cir. Nov. 2, 2023). It is appropriate under these circumstances to certify the question to the Ninth Circuit. Discovery shall continue while the Ninth Circuit considers 7-Eleven’s request. Additionally, if the Ninth Circuit does allow the appeal, then discovery will likely continue as to the other defendants—but that question can be revisited at that time. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 5, 2024 : VINCE CHHABRIA United States District Judge