Cats and Dogs Animal Hospital, Inc. v. Yelp! Inc.

Filing 1

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT against Defendant Yelp! Inc. Case assigned to Judge Valerie Baker Fairbank for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Suzanne H. Segal. (Filing fee $ 350 PAID.) Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiff Cats and Dogs Animal Hospital, Inc. (et) Modified on 3/1/2010 (et). (ds).

Download PDF
1 TFIEWESTONFIRM G R E G O R Y WESTON(239944) S. 2 J A C K FTTZGERALD 370) (2s7 r,[* ? tiff ?3 F]'1 3 8 8 8Turquoise Street ',:lr'll S a nDiego,CA 92109 ' 4 ,i,' r, , ,i,,',' t,,', T e l e p h o n e858488 1672 : 5 F a c s i m i l e : 480247 4553 greg@westonfirm.com 6 jack@westonfirm.com 7 B E C K & LEE BUSINESS TRIAL LAWYERS 8 J A R E DH. BECK (233743) 9 ELTZABETHLEE BECK (233742) Courthou PIazaBuilding se 10 2 8 WestFlaglerStreet, Suite555 1 1 M i a m i , 33130 FL Telephone: 3057890072 I2 F a c s i m i l e : 7866643334 jared@beckandlee.com 13 elizab eth@b ckandl e.com e e I4 1 5 A t t o r n e y s Plaintiffandthe Proposed for Class t6 T7 18 CATS AND DOGSANIMAL H O S P I T A LINC., on behalf itself , of 2 0 a n dall others similarlvsituated. 19 2I 22 LJ f,ffi :::.11 L I N I T E DSTATES DISTRICTCOURT C E N T R A LDISTRICTOF CALIFORNIA Case No: CV10-1340 VBF (SSx) Pleading Type:Class Action C O M P L A I N T FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR C O M P E T I T I O N LAW DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Defendant. Plaintiff, V. Y E L P !INC., 24 25 26 27 C o M p L a N TFoRVrolerroNs oF THE UNnen CovpBrtrloN Lew 1 Plaintiff Cats and Dogs Animal Hospital, Inc. ("Plaintiff" or "Cats and 2 Dogs"), on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, by and through 3 undersigned counsel, hereby sues Defendant Yelp! Inc. ("Defendant" or "Yelp") 4 and, upon information and belief and investigation of counsel, alleges as follows: 5 6 7 1. JURISDICTION AND VENUE This Court has original jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2) (The 8 Class Action Fairness Act) because the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or 9 value of $5,000,000 exclusive of interest and costs and more than two-thirds of the 10 members of the Class reside in states other than that state of which Defendant is a 11 citizen. 12 2. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because 13 Plaintiff resides in and suffered injuries as a result of Defendant's acts in this 14 district, many of the acts and transactions giving rise to this action occurred in this 15 district, and Defendants (1) are authorized to conduct business in this district and 16 have intentionally availed themselves of the laws and markets of this district 17 through the promotion, marketing, and sale of advertising in this district; (2) reside 18 in this district, and (3) are subject to personal jurisdiction in this district. 19 20 21 3. PARTIES Plaintiff Cats and Dogs is a California corporation with its principal 22 place of business in Long Beach. Cats and Dogs is owned and operated by Gregory 23 Perrault ("Dr. Perrault"), a veterinarian. 24 4. Defendant Yelp is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of 25 business in San Francisco, California. Yelp owns and operates Yelp.com, a popular 26 online directory and user-ratings website. 27 1 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 1 2 5. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The term "Web 2.0" describes internet websites and applications that 3 revolve around information sharing and user-centered design. Examples of Web 4 2.0 websites include social networking sites (e.g., Facebook.com), video sharing 5 sites (e.g., YouTube.com), wikis (e.g., Wikipedia.com), blogs, and many other 6 sites that allow users to create, upload, or modify content. Web 2.0 websites thus 7 allow internet users to do much more than simply retrieve information--the users 8 choose what information to interact with, how they interact with it, and how to 9 modify or add to pre-existing content. 10 6. Online review applications are an increasingly popular form of Web 11 2.0. Companies such as Amazon.com, Best Buy, and TripAdvisor.com, embed 12 Web 2.0 applications within their websites, which allow users to rate products and 13 services and share their experiences. 14 16 7. 8. Yelp.com, a website owned and operated by Defendant Yelp, is a Yelp.com consists of an online directory of businesses in multiple 15 website that utilizes Web 2.0 user-website interaction. 17 categories, much like an online Yellow Pages. Each business listed on Yelp.com 18 has a unique Yelp.com listing page, which provides basic business information 19 (such as address, phone number and hours of operation), and user-generated ratings 20 and reviews. 21 9. To rate businesses, internet users simply register on the Yelp.com 22 website. Any internet user (whether registered or not) can browse Yelp.com to find 23 reviews of businesses. 24 10. Ratings-based websites, including Yelp.com, are highly popular, and 25 have great power to direct the flow of commerce in a given area. Users frequently 26 read ratings and reviews for all of the businesses in a particular category and locale 27 and then decide where to spend their money based on those ratings and reviews. 2 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 1 3 11. 12. Yelp, however, regularly manipulates the content on Yelp.com listing One method Yelp uses to control content (and thereby raise or lower a 2 pages, despite Yelp's mantra of "Real people. Real reviews." 4 business's rating), is to promise to remove a business's negative reviews or 5 relocate them to the bottom of a listing page where fewer searchers will read them 6 if the business agrees to purchase a costly monthly advertising subscription from 7 Yelp. Yelp thus capitalizes on the presumed integrity of the Yelp.com ratings 8 system to extort business owners to purchase advertising. 9 13. As a result, business listings on Yelp.com, contrary to the website's 10 "Real people. Real reviews." mantra, are in fact biased in favor of businesses that 11 buy Yelp advertising. 12 13 14 16 14. 15. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS On September 12, 2009, Dr. Perrault became aware of a negative Concerned about the review's defamatory language, possible falsity, 15 review posted by "Chris R." on the Cats and Dogs Yelp.com listing page. 17 and the adverse impact it could have on his business, Dr. Perrault cross-referenced 18 the factual information alleged in the review with his client history. 19 16. Upon finding that the review of Chris R. referenced a visit that 20 occurred over 18 months prior to its posting (6 months outside of Yelp's 12-month 21 policy), Javier Vargas, the Hospital Manager at Cats and Dogs, called Yelp, on or 22 around September 15, 2009, to request that the review be removed from the 23 Yelp.com website for violating Yelp's review guidelines. The review was 24 subsequently removed from the Cats and Dogs Yelp.com listing page. 25 17. A second defamatory review, from "Kay K.," appeared on the Cats 26 and Dogs Yelp.com listing page within five days of the "Chris R." review's 27 removal. The review read: 3 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 The only reason I am even giving one star is because it wouldn't allow me to continue without it . . . otherwise, I would have given them no stars. Dr. Perrault is the rudest vet I've ever been to . . . probably one of the rudest people I've had the displeasure of meeting. I agree with the previous reviews about making you feel like an unfit mom. My pup had been sick and I had a theory on what the problem may have been and he wouldn't even entertain the idea, but instead, made me feel bad because my dog got sick. And, my poor dog was terrified of him! He made me feel like I was 2 inches tall and repeatedly looked down his nose at me. Oh, and OVER PRICED! OMG! Who does he think he is??? I did not feel welcomed by him nor his staff. I paid you for a service! No need to treat me so bad! 18. Soon after the appearance of these negative reviews, Dr. Perrault and 14 Mr. Vargas began receiving frequent, high-pressure calls from Yelp advertising 15 employees, who promised to manipulate Cats and Dogs' Yelp.com listing page in 16 exchange for Cats and Dogs purchasing an advertising subscription. 17 19. For example, on or about January 5, 2010, Cats and Dogs received a 18 Yelp sales call from "Kevin." Kevin said that Cats and Dogs could advertise with 19 Yelp for a minimum payment of $300 per month, with a minimum 12-month 20 commitment. Kevin stated that if Cats and Dogs purchased a one-year advertising 21 subscription from Yelp: 22 23 24 25 26 27 4 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW a. Yelp would hide negative reviews on the Cats and Dogs Yelp.com listing page, or place them lower on the listing page so internet users "won't see" them; b. Yelp would ensure negative reviews will not appear in Google and other search engine results; 1 2 3 4 5 6 c. d. Yelp would allow Cats and Dogs to decide the order that its reviews appear in on its Yelp.com listing page; and Cats and Dogs could choose its "tagline," i.e., the first few lines of a single review shown on every search result page in which Cats and Dogs appears (for instance, "Veterinarian in Long Beach"). 20. Dr. Perrault declined the offer, saying that he wanted to track referrals 7 from Yelp for three months without ads, but might thereafter be willing to test 8 Yelp's advertising potential. 9 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 5 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 21. 22. Within a week of denying Kevin's advertising offer, the negative Soon after, "Kay K." posted a second negative review. This review 10 review from Chris R. reappeared on the Cats and Dogs Yelp.com listing page. 12 was added on January 6, 2010, one day after Kevin's sales call: I've already left one review about how bad a vet Dr. Perrault is, but I wanted to add something. I've been reading other people's reviews and I must have gone to a different Cats and Dogs Animal Hospital with a vet named Dr. Perrault. Oh wait, no . . . he's the only one. Maybe it's a Dr. Jeckyl / Mr. Hyde thing?! I don't know. But the guy's an @$$. No other way around it. He's a jerk, a D-Bag, And so arrogant. I ran in to him in a neighborhood store right after he saw my poor sick dog at his clinic and he looked right at me, recognized me, rolled his eyes and looked away!!!! Seriously, someone needs to knock this guy down to the size he really is. He needs to drop his Napolean complex and be a professional. After my horrible experience with him, I took my sick dog to Bixby Animal Clinic and I have never had a more pleasant vet experience! Go there instead! My dog loved everyone there! 1 2 3 Sorry to rant, but I just wanted to get the word out there. Don't spend the money on this overpriced errogent vet. It's not worth it! 23. On or about January 12, 2010, Mr. Vargas contacted Yelp to protest 4 the reappearance of the "Chris R." review and the highly negative, inflammatory 5 "Kay K." reviews. 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 24. On January 13, 2010, Mr. Vargas received via email the following 7 response from Yelp: We wanted to let you know that we've taken a close look at the reviews by Chris R and Kay K, and after careful evaluation, we have decided to leave both intact. Because we don't have firsthand knowledge of a reviewer's identity or personal experience, we are not in a position to verify your claims that these reviewers are the same person, or that they are connected to the recent vandalism at your hospital. If a review appears to reflect the personal opinion and experiences of the reviewer while adhering to our review guidelines [link], it is our policy to allow the reviewer to stand behind his or her review. 25. As of January 18, 2010 Cats and Dogs enjoyed a 4-star rating (out of a 19 possible 5) on its Yelp.com listing page. Sixteen out of 26 reviews (over 60%) 20 gave Cats and Dogs a perfect 5-star rating. Despite this, as of January 18, 2010, a 21 Yelp.com search for "veterinarian in Long Beach" displayed the following tagline 22 for Dogs and Cats: 23 24 25 26 "Dr. Perrault is the most inept/rude veterinarian I have ever met. He had my rescue dog cowering and barking in the corner of the exam room within seconds of meeting him. He berated me for 20 . . ." 26. Compare Cats and Dogs' tagline to the tagline (as of January 18, 27 2010) of Bixby Animal Clinic, a Long Beach veterinary business that is a Yelp 6 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 1 advertiser (and the same company the mysterious Kay K. referred users to in her 2 second Cats and Dogs review): 3 4 5 6 "This place IS awesome. I brought my little man (Bruin) to Dr. A. as a puppy for the puppy package. They have great hours and were able to acommodate me AFTER work so I never had to take extra time . . . " 27. Yelp frequently exercises its control over the Yelp.com listing 7 application to modify business listing pages to the advantage of businesses that 8 purchase Yelp advertising subscriptions, and the disadvantage of those that 9 decline. 10 12 28. 29. Dr. Perrault's experience with Yelp was not unique, but rather typical A February 18, 2009 article in the East Bay Express, titled Yelp and 11 of Yelp's advertisement sales tactics. 13 the Business of Extortion 2.0,1 describes Yelp's unlawful business practices. 14 According to the article: 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 · Yelp sales representatives contact business owners saying, "[Y]ou have a few bad [reviews] at the top. I could do something about those. . . . We can move them. Well, for $299 a month." · Almost all the time when Yelp calls business owners, negative reviews are at the top of the business's Yelp.com listing page. · Mary Seaton, the owner of a furniture store in San Mateo, took Yelp up on an offer to remove her negative reviews if she advertised at a cost of $350 per month for six months. During that time, her negative reviews were removed and old positive ones showed up. After her contract was up, a negative review appeared, which Seaton said contained lies. Available at http://www.eastbayexpress.com/eastbay/yelp-and-the-business-ofextortion-20/Content?oid=1176635. 7 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 · Greg Quinn, the owner of a San Francisco bar and bistro, said a Yelp sales representative moved negative reviews further down his page in an effort to entice him to advertise. The sales rep called Mr. Quinn and said, "Did you notice what I did? Well, we can keep doing that for you." · An East Bay business owner said Yelp offered to move one- or two-star reviews of his business if he advertised. · Six people told the East Bay Express that Yelp sales representatives promised to move or remove negative reviews if their businesses would advertise. · Six other people told the East Bay Express that positive reviews disappeared, or negative reviews appeared, after owners declined to advertise. · Yelp pays its employees to write reviews of businesses; in one documented instance, a business owner who declined to advertise subsequently received a negative review from a Yelp employee. In other cases, businesses that receive negative reviews from paid Yelp employees are subsequently asked to advertise. · Yelp's Chief Operating Officer, Geoff Donaker, said advertisers and sales representatives do not have the ability to move or remove negative reviews. Donaker's denials are challenged both by local business owners, and by a former Yelp employee, who said that several sales reps told him they promised to move reviews to get businesses to advertise. 8 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 1 30. As of February 8, 2010, there are 140 comments on the East Bay 2 Express website following the Yelp article, many from business owners describing 3 experiences similar to those discussed in the article. 4 31. A follow-up East Bay Express article provides further evidence of 5 Yelp's unlawful sales practices. The March 18, 2009 article, Yelp Extortion 6 Allegations Stack Up: More business owners come forward with tales of unethical 7 behavior by the popular San Francisco-based web site2 states that since the 8 publication of the first article: 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 26 27 2 [M]any business owners from around the country have come forward--via emails or comments on the Express' web site--alleging similar tales of extortionist tactics by Yelp sales reps. . . . Business owners contend that they just want [an] opportunity to respond to negative, false, or damaging information about their businesses. Instead, the only way for them to salvage their businesses' reputation is by paying Yelp--regardless of whether the reviews are true or false. . . . [S]everal [interviewees] said that the reps would offer to move negative reviews if they advertised; and in some cases positive reviews disappeared when they refused, or negative ones appeared. In one case, a nightclub owner said Yelp offered positive reviews of his business in exchange for free drinks. 32. The article tells the stories of six California business owners' 22 experiences with Yelp: · After Bob Hyde, owner of M&M Auto Werkes in Campbell, received a negative rating from a customer's boyfriend, violating Yelp's Terms of Service (prohibiting third parties from posting reviews), he contacted Yelp Available at http://www.eastbayexpress.com/eastbay/yelp-extortion-allegationsstack-up/Content?oid=1176984. 9 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 sales representative Jacqueline Fitzhugh to complain. She told him, "We can't control that, but if you advertise you can control the order that they're in." After declining, Mr. Hyde noticed some of his five-star posts were disappearing. Yelp told him the website has a spam filter, like Google. Hyde tracked his reviews, printing them daily to monitor which ones would disappear. Some five-star reviews stayed up for as short as 31 days and as long as 131 days. Yelp told Hyde that if he advertised, some of those five-star reviews would come back. · Calvin Gee of Haight Street Dental in San Francisco saw his rating drop from five-stars to 3.5-stars following his declining to buy advertising. Yelp reps told Gee that if he advertised, they would let him choose his favorite review and would move the negative reviews to the bottom of the page. Gee noticed that one of his competitors, CitiDent, had two separate listings on Yelp.com. The business had more positive reviews and a higher star rating on the page that was marked a Yelp sponsor, and more negative reviews and a lower star rating on the harder to find non-sponsored page. · Larry Trujillo owns the Uptown Nightclub in Oakland. Shortly after opening the club, a Yelp sales rep began calling him "almost daily" about advertising. The sales rep would say "I notice you have a lot of positive reviews. We could make sure that those reviews stay positive." Sarah Lippman, a Sales Manager at Yelp, separately asked Mr. Trujillo for free use of his club with Yelp staff and alcohol expenses paid by the club in exchange for positive reviews on the club's Yelp.com listing page. 10 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 · Debbie Leonardo, director of membership at the Ruby Hill Golf Club in Pleasanton, received a phone call from a Yelp sales representative who told her that the business could get rid of its worst review if it purchased advertising. · Bob Kurtz, owner of Collectors Real 3 in Oakland, was contacted by a Yelp sales person after receiving a negative review. In an email, Yelp told him that, as a paid advertiser, the negative review could be dealt with. · Nicholas Paul, an instructor at a Chicago art studio, declined to purchase advertising and shortly thereafter three positive reviews disappeared from and two negative ones were added to the studio's Yelp.com listing page. A Yelp sales rep told Mr. Paul he could control that. 33. An August 13, 2008 article in The Register, a news website, titled 16 Yelp "pay to play" pitch makes shops scream for help: User generated discontent3 17 notes that: 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3 At least some of Yelp's sales staff hope to make money by offering to hide what you and I have to say. Over the last year, five San Francisco Bay Area business have told The Register that the company has offered to "push bad reviews to the bottom" of their yelp pages if they paid to advertise on the site. One restaurant owner was contacted "five or six" times, and each time, the Yelp sales rep insisted that if he forked over $6,000 a year for "sponsored link" status, the site would suppress user posts that put his restaurant in a less-than-positive light. "They told me I had 60 reviews on my [Yelp] Available at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/13/yelp_sales_pitch/print.html 11 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 1 2 3 page," said the owner . . . . "They told me `No one is going to read all 60. They're only going to read the first few.'" 34. A March 9, 2009 Chicago Tribune article, titled Questions arise over 4 Yelp's ads, reviews; Businesses say site rearranges opinions for price; CEO 5 denies,4 reported: 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 4 5 · Ina Pinkney of Ina's restaurant in the West Loop said that last summer a Yelp salesperson offered "to move up my good reviews if I sponsored one of their events. They called it rearranging my reviews." · Jason Luros, an attorney at Hudson & Luros in Napa, California, stated "one of our reviews mysteriously disappeared, so I contacted Yelp and was given the usual canned response about how no humans control the reviews. But when I said I would consider advertising if they restored the review, it mysteriously reappeared." 35. An April 3, 2009 article in the Santa Monica Daily Press titled Yelp 18 Sales Tactics Cause Concern Among Businesses,5 reported: After declining to advertise, the [Los Angeles area] business owner checked the Yelp page again and noticed that at least 10 positive reviews had disappeared while a few negative ones had been posted. . . . They estimate that at least 20 positive reviews had been deleted from the site since the conversation with Yelp about three weeks ago. No longer available online. Available at http://www.smdp.com/Articles-c-2009-04-0252021.113116_Yelp_sales_tactics_cause_for_concern_among_businesses.html 12 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 page. 8 10 38. 39. 36. CLASS REPRESENTATION ALLEGATIONS Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of itself and the following Class: All persons and entities (excluding officers, directors, and employees of Yelp) in the United States for which Yelp has offered or threatened to manipulate a Yelp.com listing page in exchange for purchasing or declining to purchase advertising. 37. Like Cats and Dogs, all members of the Class have a Yelp.com listing Like Cats and Dogs, all members of the Class were contacted by Yelp Like Cats and Dogs, all members of the Class were promised that, if 9 sales representatives. 11 they purchased advertising from Yelp, negative reviews would be removed or 12 relocated from their Yelp.com listing pages, or those pages would otherwise be 13 favorably manipulated, including through their own input or control. 14 40. Like Cats and Dogs, all members of the Class were threatened, 15 implicitly or expressly, that if they did not purchase advertising from Yelp, their 16 Yelp.com listing pages would be detrimentally manipulated, including for 17 example, by removing positive reviews and posting new, negative reviews. 18 20 22 23 24 25 26 27 13 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW 41. 42. Plaintiff's claims on behalf of the Class are maintainable under Rules The questions of law and fact common to Plaintiff and the Class a. Whether Yelp violated the Unfair Competition Law; b. Whether Plaintiff and the Class were injured by the conduct complained of herein; c. Whether the conduct described herein is ongoing; and d. Whether members of the class are entitled to injunctive relief. 19 23(b)(2) and 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 21 include: 1 2 3 5 43. 44. CLAIM FOR RELIEF Violations of the Unfair Competition Law, Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 Plaintiff realleges and incorporates the allegations elsewhere in the The advertising sales and employee reviewing practices of Yelp as 4 Complaint as if set forth in full herein. 6 alleged herein constitute unfair business acts and practices because they are 7 immoral, unscrupulous, and offend public policy. 8 45. The practices of Yelp complained of herein had no countervailing 9 benefit to consumers or competition when weighed against the harm caused by 10 such practices. 11 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 14 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, on behalf of itself, all others similarly situated, and A. B. C. D. Declaring this action to be a proper class action. An order permanently enjoining Yelp from engaging in the practices complained of herein. An order compelling Yelp to disgorge all monies, revenues, and profits obtained by means of its wrongful acts and practices. An order requiring Yelp to pay restitution to restore all funds acquired by means of any act or practice declared by this Court to be unlawful, plus pre- and post- judgment interest thereon. E. F. Costs, expenses, and reasonable attorneys' fees. Any other and further relief the Court deems necessary, just, or proper. 14 the general public, prays for judgment and relief against Yelp Inc. as follows: JURY DEMAND Plaintiffdemandstrialbyjury. a D A T E D :Februarv 22.2010 R espectfully Submitted, 6 7 8 9 10 11 I2 13 I4 15 16 T7 18 I9 20 2T 22 23 24 25 26 27 G r e g o r y Weston S. THsWpsroNFrnna G r e g o r y Weston S. JackFitzgerald 8 8 8Turquoise Street S a nDiego,CA 92109 T e l e p h o n e858488 1672 : F a c s i m i l e : 480247 4553 B p c r &LnnBusrNpss Truer LawyBRs J a r e d Beck H. Elizabethlee Beck C o u r t h o u sPlaza e Building 2 8 WestFlaglerStreet, Suite555 M i a m i , 33130 FL Telephone: 3057890072 F a c s i m i l e : 7866643334 CovrplerNT FoRVrollrrous oF THEUNran CorrlpnrruoN Law Name& Address: YELP!INC 7 0 6MissionSt, 7th Floor SanFrancisco, 94103 CA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CATSAND DOGS ANIMAL HOSPITAL, INC.,ON behalf itselfandall others of similarlvsituated. PLATNTTFF(S) CASENUMBER vBF (SSx) C V 1 0-1340 SUMMONS DEFENDANT(S). TO: Y DEFENDANT(S):E L P ! INC A lawsuithasbeenfiled againstyou. Within 2I daysafter serviceof this summons you (not countingthe day you receivedit), you on must serveon the plaintiff an answerto the attached d"ornptuint I amended complaint I counterclaim cross-claimor a motion underRule 12 of the FederalRules of Civil Procedure. The answer tr or motion mustbe servedon the plaintiff s attorney, GregoryS. Weston is , whoseaddress -T h e Weston Firm, 888 Turquoise Skeet,SanDiego,CA 92109 . myou fail to do so, judgmentby defaultwill be enteredagainstyou for the relief demanded the complaint. You alsomust file in your answeror motion with the court. C l e r k ,U.S. District Court Dated: Frgzs zolu [Use 60 days if the defendantis the United Statesor a United Statesqgency,or is an fficer or employeeof the lJnited States. Allowed 60 days by Rule Iz(a)(s)1. UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURT C E N T R A L DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA NOTICEOF ASSIGNMENT UNITEDSTATES TO MAGISTRATBJTJDGE FORDISCOVERY This case beenassigned District Judge has to ValerieBakerFairbankandthe assigned discovery Magistrate Judge Suzanne Segal. is H. The case numberon all documents filed with the Courtshouldreadasfollows: c v 1 0- 1 3 4 0 v B F ( S S x ) Pursuanto General t Order05-07of the UnitedStates District Courtfor the Central District of California,the Magistrate Judge beendesignated heardiscovery has related to motions. All discovery relatedmotionsshouldbe noticedon the calendar the Magistrate Judge of ::::::::--:::::::::::::::::--::::::::::: N O T I C E COUNSEL TO (if A copyof thisnoticemustbe served withthe summons complaint all defendants a removalactionis and on filed,a copyof thisnotice mustbe served all plaintiffs). on Subsequent documents mustbe filedat thefollowing location: Division [ [ l ' Western ' 312N. SpringSt.,Rm.G-8 L o s Angeles,CA 90012 Division Division I I Southern ] I Eastern 3470TwelfthSt.,Rm.134 411WestFourthSt.,Rm.1-053 CA Riverside, 92501 SantaAna, CA92701-4516 returned you. to F a i l u r e fileat theproper will in being to location result yourdocuments c v - 1 8 (03/06) FORDISCOVERY MAGTSTRATE JUDGE NOTTCE ASSTGNMENT UNTTED TO STATES OF UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURT,CENTRALDISTRICT OF.CALIFORNIA C r y I L COVERSIIEET I (a) PLAINTIFFS (Checkbox ifyou are representing yourself tr) C A T S AND DOGS ANIMAL HOSPITAL, INC., on Behalf of Itself and All DEFENDANTS Y E L P !INC. OtherSimilarlv s Situated (b) Attomeys (FirmName, Address Telephone and Number. you arerepresenting Attomeys (If Known) If yoursel4 provide same.) TheWeston Firm,Gregory Weston, Turquoise S. 888 Street, Diego, San CA (858) 92109 488-1672;BeckandLeeBusiness Trial Lawyers, Jared Beck, H. 28West Flagler (305)789' 0072 SfeetSuite 555,Miami,FL 33130 I I . BASIS OF JURISDICTION @lacean X in one box onlv.) C I T I Z E N S H I PO['PRINCIPAL PARTIES- For Diversity Cases Only ( P l a c e X in oneboxfor plaintiffand for defendant.) an one C i t i z e n ThisState of tr 1 U.S.Govemment Plaintiff (U.S. tr 3 Federal Question Government a Partv) Not "# a2 tJrt I n c o r p o r a t e d Principal or Place o f B u s i n e sin thisState s P T F DEX' n4 tr4 tr5 tr5 tr6 n6 ! 2 U.S.Government Defendant d4 Diuerrity(Indicate CitizenshipC i t i z e n Another of State of Par t ies ItemIII) in a2 Incorporated Principal and Place o f B u s i n e s s Another in State Foreign Nation C i t i z e n o r S u b j e c t o f a F o r e i g n C o !3 t r y D3 un I V . ORIGIN (Placean X in one box only.) dt Orieinal D 2 Removed from Proceeding StateCourt ! 3 Remanded from A p p e l l a t e Court E 4 Reinstated or Reopened V . REQUESTED COMPLAINT: JURY DEMAND: dYes IN c lA s s AcrIoN underF.R.G.P. dYes 2s: tr No E 5 Transfened another from district(speciry): n 6 Multi! 7 Appeal District to District Judge from Litigation Magistrate Judge 'Yes' onlyif demanded complaint.) D No (Check in n MoNEy DEMANDEDIN coMpLAINT: $ V I . CAUSE Of' ACTION (Cite the U.S. Civil Statuteunder which you are fiting and write a brief statement cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes of unlessdiversity.) Prof Code g 17200 9 o m p l a i n t for Violations of the Unfair Competition Law, Bus aurd V U . NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in one box only.) 1 1 0I n s u r a n c e tr 410 Antitrust 120 Marine tr 430 Banks Banking and 1 3 0 M i l l e r Act tr 450 Commerce/ICC 140 N e g o t i a b l eInstrument Rates/etc. 1 5 0 R e c o v e r yof tr 460 Deportation Overpayment & tr 470 Racketeerlnfluenced E n f o r c e m e n tof andCom:pt Judgment Organizations 1 5 1M e d i c a r e Act t r 480 ConsumerCredit 152 R e c o v e r y ofDefaulted ! 4 9 0 Cable/SatTV S t u d e n tLoan (Excl. D 810 Selective Service Veterans) f l 850 Securities/Commodities/ R e c o v e r yof lfJ Exchange Overpayment of t r 875 CustomerChallenge 12 V e t e r a n ' s Benefits usc 3410 1 6 0 Stockholders'Suits / , M 890 Other Statutory Actions 1 9 0 O t h e r Contract ! 891 Agricultural Act 1 9 5 C o n t r a c tProduct t r 892 Economic Stabilization Liability Act 196 Franchise tr 893 Environmental Matters t r 894 EnergyAllocationAct 2r0 L a n d Condemnation D 895 Freedom oflnfo. Act 220 F o r e c l o s u r e t r 900 Appeal ofFeeDetermi- 230 R e n t Lease& Ejectrnent nationUnderEqual 240 T o r t s to Land 1A< Access Justice to T o r t Product Liability t r 950 Constitutionalityof 290 Al l Other Real Property State Statutes frf400 StateReapportionment i t ffi 3 1 0 Airplane 3 1 5 AirplaneProduct Liability 3 2 0 Assault,Libel & Slander 3 3 0 F e d .Employers' Liability 340 Marine 3 4 s Marine Product Liability 3 s 0 Motor Vehicle J)) M o t o r Vehicle P r o d u c tLiability 3 6 0 Oth e rPersonal Injury JOZ P e r s o n aInjuryl M e d Malpractice JO) P e r s o n aInjuryl P r o d u c tLiability 3 6 8 Asbestos Personal Injury Product 5 1 0 Motions to 3 7 0 Other Fraud Vacate Sentence 3 7 1 TruthinLending H a b e a sCorpus 3 8 0 Other Personal 5 3 0 General Property Damage 5 3 5 Death Penalty 3 8 5 Property Damage 5 4 0 Mandamus/ P r o d u c tLiabili Other 5 5 0 Civil Rights 7 1 0 Fair Labor Standards Act 422 Appeal USC 28 1s8 4 2 3 Withdrawal29 720 Labor/Ivigmt. Relations 7 3 0 Labor^{gmt. Reporting & D i s c l o s u rAct e 740 RailwayLaborAct 7 9 0 Otherlabor Litigation 7 9 1 Empl. Ret.Inc. 820 Copyrights 8 3 0 Patent 840 8 6 1 H r A (1395f0 862 B l a c kr ung(923) 8 6 3 DIwC/DIWW (a0s(g)) 8 6 4 SSIDTitle XVI 8 6 s RSI (U.S.Plaintiff 8 7 0 Taxes or Defendant) 8 7 1 lRS-ThirdParty26 u s c 1s7 4 4 1 Voting 4 4 2 Employment 4 4 3 Housing/Accommodations 4 4 4 Welfare 4 4 5 American with Disabilities Employment 4 4 6 American with Disabilities Other 4 4 0 Other Civil Rights 6 1 0 Agriculture 6 2 0 OtherFood& Drug 6 2 5 DrugRelated Seizure of P r b p e r t y USC 21 881 t r 630 Liquorlaws t r 640 R.R.& Truck t r 650 AirlineRegs 6 6 0 Occupational Safety /Health 4 6 2 Naturalization Application 4 6 3 Habeas CorpusA l i e n Detainee 4 6 5 OtherImmigration Actions n 690 Other usc 7609 L v lu -rJ4u vttt' (ssx) X ' OROFFICI USEO|ILY: Case Number: AX"TER COMPLETINGTIIE FRONT SIDE OFFORM CV-71, COMPLETETHE INFORMATIONREQUESTEDBELOW. cv-71(05/08) CryILCOVERSHEET P a g e I of2 UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURT,CENTRALDISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CryILCOVERSHEET v t r I( a ) ' IDENTICAL CASES: thisaction Has previously been filed in thisoourt dismissed, and remanded closed?dNo or Ify e s , list case number(s): V I I I ( b ) . RELATED CASES: Have any casesbeen previously filed in this court that are relatedto the presentcase? dwo I f y e s , list casenumber(s): _ C i v i l casesare deemedrelated if a previously liled case and the present case: ( C h e c k all boxesthat apply) fl A. Arise from the sameor closely relatedtransactions, happenings, events;or or n B. Call for determinationofthe sameor substantially relatedor similar questionsof law and fact; or E C . Forotherreasonswouldentailsubstantialduplicationoflaborifheardbydifferentjudges;or f l D. Involve the samepatent,trademarkor copyrigh! and one ofthe factors identified above in a, b or c also is present. IX. V E I I U E : (When completing followinginformation, anadditional the use sheet necessary.) if ( a ) L i s t theCounty thisDistrict; in Califomia Countyoutside thisDisfiict;State other of if thanCalifomia; Foreign or plaintiffresides. Country, whichEACH named in n yes fJ yes n Checkhereifthegovemment-itsasenciesoremnloveesisanamednlaintiff Tfthiqhnvicnhenlrpd d^r^irFtr/h\ C o u n t yin this District:* Califomia County outsideof this District; State,if other than Califomia; or Foreign Country - o s Angeles ( b ) L i s t the County in this District; Califomia County outside of this Distict; Stateif other than Califomia; or Foreign Country, in which EACH nameddefendant resides. tr C h e c k h e r e i tfhh e e o v e m m e nts-agenciesori e s o r e m n l ois e e s i s a ndefendantf eI fnttd asnht n y iis c h e c L e dgo rto iitem l c \ te l t i t s a s e n c emDlovees v a named a m e d d e h i box s checked,o n n r e m h C o u n t vin this District:* Califomia County outsideofthis District; State,ifother than California; or Foreign Counfiy S a nFrancisco ( c ) ListtheCounty thisDistrict; in Califomia Countyoutside thisDistrict; of State other if thanCalifornia; Foreign or Country, whichIACH claimarose. in N o t e : In land c o n d e m n a t i o n cases.use tne location ofthe tract of land invoh ' e d . County in this District:t Califomia County outsideof this District; State,if other than Califomia; or Foreign Country - o s Angeles * Los Angeles, Orange' San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, Santa Barbaran or San Luis Obispo Counties X. SIGNATURE ATTORNEY(ORPROPER): OF o ^ t " z -"l - [o N o t i c e to CounseUPafties: The CV-7 1 (JS-44) Civil Cover Sheetandthe informationcontainedhereinneitherreplacenor supplement filing and serviceofpleadings the orotherpapersasrequiredbyiaw. Thisform,approvedbytheJudicialConferenceoftheUnitedStatesinSeptemberlgT4,isrequiredpursuanttoLocalRule3-lisnotfiled butisusedbytheClerkoftheCourtforthepurposeofstatistics,venueandinitiatingthecivi[docketsheet-(Formoredetailedinstrctions,seeseparateinstuctio K e y to Statisticalcodesrelatingto Social Security Cases: N atu reofSuit Code 86t Abbreviation S u b s t a n t i v e Statement of Cause of Action A l l claims for health insurance benefits(Medicare)under Title 18, Part A, ofthe Social SecurityAct, as amended. A l s o , include claims by hospitals,skilled nursing facilities, etc., for certification as providersofservices uriderthe p r o g r a m . (42 U.S.C.1935FF(b) A l l claims for "Black Lung" benefitsunderTitle 4, Part B, of the FederalCoal Mine Health and SafetyAct of 1969. 862 ( 3 0u.s.c.923) DrwC 863 A1lclaims filed by insured workers disability for insurance benefits under Title 2 ofthe Social Security as Act, plus am ended; all claims filedfor child'sinsurance benefits based disability.(42U.S.C. on a05(g)) All claims filedfor widows widowers or insurance benefits based disability on under Title2 ofthe Social Security (42 Ac t , asamended. U.S.C.405(g)) All claims supplemental for payments security incorne based upondisability filed under Title 16ofthe Socialsecurity Ac t ,asamended. Drww RSI (old All claimsfor retirement age)andsurvivors benefits underTifle 2 ofthe SocialSecurity (42 Act, asamended. (e)) u.s.c. cv-71(05/oE) CIVIL COVER SItf,ET Page2 of2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?