Try our Advanced Search for more refined results

Barraza v. Cricket Wireless, LLC et al

Track this case

Case Number:

3:15-cv-02471

Court:

California Northern

Nature of Suit:

Other Statutory Actions

Multi Party Litigation:

Class Action

Judge:

Firms

Companies

Sectors & Industries:

Technology
- Domestic
- Wireless Communications

December 18, 2015
Cricket Wireless, Customers Settle Portions Of False Ad Suit

AT&T subsidiary Cricket Wireless and a proposed class of consumers who say the network falsely advertised its bandwidth and coverage area have come to an accord over attorneys' fees, one of the last remaining issues in the case, they told a California federal judge Friday.
November 03, 2015
Trial Needed In Cricket Wireless False Ad Suit, Judge Says

A California federal judge denied a bid by AT&T subsidiary Cricket Wireless to force arbitration on customers who say the network falsely advertised its bandwidth and coverage area, telling both parties Tuesday to saddle up for a trial on whether the customers ever accepted a contract containing the clause.
October 29, 2015
Cricket Says Network False-Ad Claims Must Be Arbitrated

Cricket Wireless LLC urged a California federal judge Thursday to force arbitration in a proposed class action claiming the company misled California consumers about the range and capability of its "unlimited 4G/LTE" cell phone network, arguing that their user agreements require them to arbitrate such claims.
August 28, 2015
Cricket, Plaintiff Can't Stay Discovery In 4G Coverage Suit

A California federal judge denied a joint motion to stay discovery and extend motion deadlines Thursday in a proposed class action accusing Cricket Wireless LLC of falsely advertising and misleading California consumers about the range and capability of its "unlimited 4G/LTE" cell phone network.
June 04, 2015
AT&T, Cricket Hit With Class Action Over 4G Coverage

Cricket Wireless LLC and its parent, AT&T Inc., were hit with a class action in California federal court on Wednesday, with the lead plaintiff complaining that Cricket marketed "unlimited 4G/LTE," but could provide the service only to a fraction of customers.