BMW Files Motions to Dismiss, Strike Class Action Status in Sunroof Case

Though the judge in the U.S. Northern District Court of California recently gave plaintiffs the opportunity to file a second-amended complaint, in two new filings, BMW’s attorneys claim the case should be dismissed for “lack of standing” and have asked the judge to strike the class allegations. The plaintiffs allege their vehicles suffered water damage after the drainage tubes installed to pull water away from the sunroofs did not properly work.

Plaintiffs’ Monita Sharma and Eric Anderson successfully argued that their case should include California residents who have “owned or leased any BMW X5 series vehicles, X3 series vehicles and 5 series vehicles.” In an earlier ruling, the judge decided that their allegations are “sufficient” to represent a class action at the pleading stage of their case.

“As true for all of their claims and allegations, this court already has provided ample opportunity for amendment. Plaintiffs’ refusal to change their allegations show that plaintiffs’ claims now should be dismissed,” BMW’s attorneys write in court documents.

BMW’s attorneys argue the alleged defects are not safety related and that only the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has the power to order a recall.

“The comprehensiveness of the Safety Act and breadth of authority vested in NHTSA shows that a recall ordered by this court would ‘prevent or frustrate’ Congress’ objectives,” the automaker’s attorneys claim.

They ask the court to defer to NHTSA’s expertise in this matter.

“BMW [North America] has no duty to recall the class vehicles because it has not been ordered to do so by NHTSA,” attorneys contend.

In a second motion, BMW’s attorneys write, “by this motion, BMW seeks to strike all allegations made on behalf of the putative class stricken without leave to amend.

Plaintiffs cannot represent the putative class specified in their complaint because the class is simply too broad and faces overwhelming individualized inquiries and because plaintiffs cannot satisfy basic typicality requirements. These deficiencies are plain, even at the pleading stage. For the foregoing reasons, the class allegations therein should be stricken,” BMW’s attorneys claim

The plaintiffs had not responded in the court system at press time and the judge has not issued any new decisions.

This article is from glassBYTEs™, the free e-newsletter that covers the latest auto glass industry news. Click HERE to sign up—there is no charge. Interested in a deeper dive? Free subscriptions to Auto Glass Repair and Replacement (AGRR) magazine in print or digital format are available. Subscribe at no charge HERE.

This entry was posted in glassBYTEs Original Story and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to BMW Files Motions to Dismiss, Strike Class Action Status in Sunroof Case

  1. Pingback: Plaintiffs File Motions Opposing BMW’s Request to Dismiss Sunroof Case |

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *