(CAL. CIV. CODE § 1750, ET SEQ.) ................................................................................... 23  THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION  VIOLATIONS OF THE FALSE ADVERTSING LAW  (CAL. BUS.  & PROF CODE §§ 17500, ET SEQ.) .................................................................................... 26  16.  Since the first Apple iPhone was released in 2007, Apple has achieved unparalleled  success in creating a product with a strong global following.  With each subsequent generation of  iPhone, consumers have been impressed by yet another technological breakthrough that  revolutionizes the market for mobile devices.  As a result, consumers rely on Apple’s representations  on how its devices will operate and what to do if there is flaw in the product.   48.  Under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff Palmer seeks  certification of a Class defined as follows:  All AT&T wireless subscribers who purchased the Apple Devices  during the four years prior to the filing of the complaint which ran on  any version of iOS 6 or 7, or iOS 8.0.   49.  Excluded from the Class are Defendant; the officers, directors or employees of  Defendant; any entity in which Defendant has a controlling interest; and any affiliate, legal  representative, heir or assign of Defendant.  Also, excluded from the Class are any federal, state or  local governmental entities, any judicial officer presiding over this action and the members of his/her  immediate family and judicial staff, and any juror assigned to this action.   50.  Plaintiff Palmer does not know the exact number of Class members at the present  time.  However, due to the nature of the trade and commerce involved, there appear to be hundreds  of thousands of Class members such that joinder of all Class members is impracticable.   51.  The Class is easily determined by objective criteria permitting self-identification in  response to notice, and notice can be provided through techniques similar to those customarily used  in other consumer fraud cases and complex class actions, and through Apple’s business records.   52.  There are questions of both law and fact common to the Class.  Defendant’s unlawful  omissions similarly impact Class members, all of who purchased one or more Apple Devices.   59.  Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all paragraphs alleged herein.   60.  Plaintiff Palmer brings this claim on behalf of himself and all Class members.   61.  Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 prohibits any “unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent  business act or practice.”  Defendant has engaged in unlawful, and unfair, and fraudulent business  acts and practices in violation of the UCL.   62.  Defendant has violated the unlawful prong by virtue of their violations of the CLRA  and FAL as described below.   76.  Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all paragraphs alleged herein.   77.  Plaintiff Palmer brings this claim on behalf of herself and all Class members.   78.  Defendants are “persons” under Cal. Civ. Code § 1761(c).   79.  Plaintiff Palmer and Class members are “consumers,” as defined by Cal. Civ. Code  § 1761(d), who purchased Apple Devices, which are “goods or services” under Cal. Civ. Code §  1770(a).   80.  Cal. Civ. Code § 1770(a)(2) prohibits “[m]isrepresenting the source, sponsorship,  approval, or certification of goods or services.”     81.  Cal. Civ. Code § 1770(a)(5) prohibits “[r]epresenting that goods or services have  sponsorship, approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities which they do not  have….”   82.  Cal. Civ. Code § 1770(a)(7) prohibits “[r]epresenting that goods or services are of a  particular standard, quality, or grade, or that goods are of a particular style or model, if they are of  another.”   83.  Apple violated these CLRA provisions by misrepresenting the sponsorship, approval,  certification, characteristics, benefits, standards, and quality of its Apple Devices and omitting  disclosure of material aspects thereof in its advertising.   96.  Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all paragraphs alleged herein.   97.  Plaintiff Palmer brings this claim on behalf of himself and all Class members.   98.  California Business & Professions Code §§ 17500, et seq. (the “FAL”) broadly  proscribes deceptive advertising in this State.  Section 17500 makes it unlawful for any corporation  intending to sell products or perform services to make any statement in advertising those products or  services concerning any circumstance or matter of fact connected with the proposed performance or  disposition thereof, which is untrue or misleading, and which is known, or which by the exercise of  reasonable care should be known, to be untrue or misleading, or not to sell those products or services  as advertised at the price stated therein, or as so advertised.    A.  Apple Releases the iPhone 5 and the iOS 6 Operating System.   A.  Apple Releases the iPhone 5 and the iOS 6 Operating System. .................................. 5  B.  Apple Releases the iPhone 5 in the Midst of Fierce Competition from Samsung. ..... 7  C.  Partially In Response to Products Like the iPhone, AT&T Ends Unlimited Data Plans  and Moves Subscribers to Tiered Data Plans .............................................................. 8  D.  Users Report Explosions in their Data Usage. .......................................................... 10  E.  While Failing to Disclose the Defect’s Existence, Apple Repairs the Defect for  Verizon Subscribers ................................................................................................... 12  F.  Despite Indications of a Repair, the Problem Persists for AT&T Subscribers Through  the Release of iOS 7 and iPhone 5s ........................................................................... 16  IV.  V.  CAUSES OF ACTION .......................................................................................................... 20  FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION VIOLATION OF THE CALIFORNIA UNFAIR COMPETITION  VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSUMERS LEGAL REMEDIES ACT   (CAL. CIV. CODE § 1750, et seq.)   VIOLATIONS OF THE FALSE ADVERTSING LAW   (CAL. BUS. & PROF CODE §§ 17500, et seq.)   VIOLATION OF THE CALIFORNIA UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW   (CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE § 17200, et seq.)  