Coronavirus (COVID-19) Support Resource Center

 

Cottrell v AT&T, Pacific Bell and DirecTV Litigation

United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Oakland Division
Case No. 19-cv-07672

If you are a California resident who, while living in California, had AT&T or DirecTV open or charge you for an unauthorized product or service, and would like to know more about your rights, please contact Keller Rohrback at 800-776-6044, consumer@kellerrohrback.com, or by using the secure form to the right. An unauthorized product or service could include the DirecTV Now streaming service, now called AT&T TV Now, or AT&T’s business internet service.


Case Status

The Court recently denied AT&T’s motion to compel arbitration. AT&T’s motion to dismiss was granted in part and denied in part. That means the case is going forward into the “discovery” stage of the litigation. Discovery focuses on gathering evidence related to the issues and the claims asserted in the complaint. It includes requests for the production of documents, responding to written questions, taking depositions, and retaining experts and preparing their reports and eventual testimony.

Case Overview

On February 2, 2020, Plaintiff’s First Amended Class Action Complaint was filed against AT&T, Inc., and its subsidiaries Pacific Bell Telephone Co., and DirecTV, LLC alleging violations of California consumer-protection laws.

Plaintiff alleges that AT&T is opening unauthorized accounts and charging people for services and products they do not request, such as the DirecTV Now streaming service or an AT&T business internet account. Often, it takes people months to realize that they are being charged. This is likely because an AT&T employee told them the product was “free” or because the AT&T employee opened the account without even telling the person, using credit card information AT&T already has on file. This practice has been occurring for several years in California and throughout the United States. It can occur at an AT&T store or over the phone while talking to an AT&T sales representative.

Defendants responded to the First Amended Complaint with a Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Stay Litigation. On May 27, 2020, the Court denied the motion to compel arbitration, allowing the litigation to move forward. Defendants have appealed the denial of the motion compelling arbitration to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The briefing on the appeal will continue into the fall of 2020.    

On August 19, 2020, the Court denied the Defendants Motion to Dismiss in Part the First Amended Complaint.  This Order allows most of the Plaintiffs’ claims to move forward, including claims for unjust enrichment, conversion, and statutory claims under California law.

You may review certain court-filed documents below.

If you would like more information regarding this case, please email us, call us, or use the secure form below. 

Website Design by 3Circle Media