Author:By Deborah Renner , Baker Hostetler
“Class Action Defense News”
Fraud class actions have become increasingly difficult to certify over the years as courts routinely have held that individualized issues of reliance swamp any common issues. Plaintiffs’ attorneys thus have been keen to attempt to transform fraud claims into breach of contract claims and claims under consumer protection statutes. That approach failed miserably for plaintiffs in In re Facebook, Inc. PPC Advertising Litigation, No. C 09-3043 PJH, slip op. (N.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2012), when the court denied class certification as it searched in vain for the purported contract and likewise held that plaintiffs’ unfair business practices claim under California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) could not be certified as it was dependent on the elusive contract.
The case centers on allegations that Facebook breached “cost-per-click” (“CPC”) contracts with its advertisers and engaged in unfair business practices by charging advertisers for illegitimate “clicks,”i.e., clicks that were either unintended by a Facebook user or that failed when that user attempted to get to the advertisement.
Relying on Mazza v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., 666 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2012) the court conducted a rigorous analysis of the Rule 23 criteria and held that plaintiffs could not demonstrate the predominance of common questions: Read More