Facts

Simon Levay, Judith Willis, and Lionel Brown filed a putative class action lawsuit against AARP Inc. and AARP Services Inc. in relation to defendants' marketing and endorsement of insurance policies.

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs contended that they joined and paid to be AARP members after being induced by unlawful, misleading, and unfair representations of products, services, and endorsements by AARP and AARP's concealment of unlawful for-profit business activities. Specifically, plaintiffs contended that they relied on AARP's misrepresentations that it protected seniors and put seniors' interests ahead of for-profit business ventures. Plaintiffs alleged that AARP induced plaintiffs to join AARP by claiming it put seniors first but its primary purpose was to generate profits. Plaintiffs brought their claims under California's unfair competition law and false advertising law.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants contended that plaintiffs did not identify any misrepresentations they made concerning membership benefits, and plaintiffs failed to identify how any alleged representation was false. Further, defendants claimed that even assuming their endorsement could be considered an implied promise of superiority, specifically, that the endorsements represented the products were the best for seniors, plaintiffs did not identify any actionable misrepresentation because it was a generalized representation not giving rise to a claim for relief. Defendants also argued that plaintiffs' third amended complaint failed to allege any statements made by AARP, only advertisements run by United Healthcare and New York Life.

Result

The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss with prejudice. The court first found that plaintiffs identified representations made by AARP, since it permitted its name to appear on the advertisements at issue and the representations led plaintiffs to believe the endorsements were AARP's actual stamp of approval. The court concluded that defendants' use of the word "best" in AARP's endorsement of insurance products is undefined and is not an actionable representation. Further, the court determined that AARP's endorsement of insurance products for revenue, as a non-profit is not inconsistent with being an advocate for seniors and fails to state a claim for relief. Further, the court held that plaintiffs' misrepresentation allegation failed to meet the particularity requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b).