Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 1 of 36 Page ID #:1
`
`
`
`Carney R. Shegerian, State Bar No. 150461
`CShegerian@Shegerianlaw.com
`Anthony Nguyen, State Bar No. 259154
`ANguyen@Shegerianlaw.com
`Cheryl A. Kenner, State Bar No. 305758
`CKenner@Shegerianlaw.com
`SHEGERIAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
`11520 San Vicente Boulevard
`Los Angeles, California 90049
`Telephone Number: (310) 860-0770
`Facsimile Number: (310) 860-0771
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff ALISON WHITE,
`individually, and for all others similarly
`situated
`
`
`
`ALISON WHITE, an individual, on
`behalf of herself and all others
`similarly situated,
`
`
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`WESTERN DIVISION
`
`
` Case No.
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`FOR VIOLATIONS OF:
`
`(1) CONSUMER LEGAL
`REMEDIES ACT, Cal. Civ. Code
`§§ 1750, et seq.;
`(2) FALSE ADVERTISING LAW,
`Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17500,
`et seq.;
`(3) UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW,
`Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200, et
`seq.;
`(4) NEGLIGENT
`MISREPRESENTATION;
`INTENTIONAL
`(5)
`MISREPRESENTATION; and
`(6) BREACH OF EXPRESS
`WARRANTY, Cal. Comm. Code
`§§ 2313, et seq.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`RING LLC, a Delaware Limited
`Liability Company; THE HOME
`DEPOT, INC. dba HOME DEPOT
`U.S.A., INC., a Delaware Corporation;
`AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC dba
`AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware
`Corporation; DOES 1 through 100,
`inclusive,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 2 of 36 Page ID #:2
`
`
`
`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
`28
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`Page
`INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1
`I.
`II. NATURE OF THE ACTION ................................................................................ 1
`III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE ............................................................................ 6
`IV. PARTIES ............................................................................................................... 7
`V. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF
`ACTION ................................................................................................................ 9
`VI. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS .................................................................... 13
`VII. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION .............................................................................. 17
`Violations of the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act Cal. Civ.
`Code §§ 1750, et seq. (On Behalf of the California Subclass) ........................... 17
`VIII. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION ......................................................................... 20
`Violations of California’s False Advertising Law (“FAL”) Bus. & Prof.
`Code §§ 17500, et seq. (On Behalf of the California Subclass) ......................... 20
`IX. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION............................................................................. 22
`Violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) Bus. & Prof.
`Code §§ 17200, et seq. (On Behalf of the California Subclass) ......................... 22
`“Unlawful” Prong .......................................................................................... 23
`“Unfair” Prong .............................................................................................. 24
`“Fraudulent” Prong ........................................................................................ 25
`“Unfair, Deceptive, Untrue or Misleading Advertising” Prong ................... 25
`X. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION ......................................................................... 26
`Negligent Misrepresentation (On Behalf of the National Class and the
`California Subclass) ............................................................................................. 26
`XI. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION .............................................................................. 27
`Intentional Misrepresentation (On Behalf of the National Class and the
`California Subclass) ............................................................................................. 27
`XII. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION ............................................................................. 29
`Breach of Express Warranty Cal. Com. Code §§ 2313, et seq. (On Behalf
`of the National Class and the California Subclass) ............................................. 29
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF .............................................................................................. 31
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL ................................................................................... 34
`- i -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 3 of 36 Page ID #:3
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`I.
`Plaintiff ALISON WHITE (“Plaintiff” or “Ms. White”), individually, and
`1.
`on behalf of all others similarly situated, brings this consumer Class Action Complaint
`against Defendants RING LLC (“Ring”); THE HOME DEPOT, INC. doing business
`as HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC. (“Home Depot”); and AMAZON.COM SERVICES
`LLC doing business as AMAZON.COM, INC. (“Amazon”), and Does 1 through 100
`inclusive, collectively, “Defendants,” for unlawful, unfair, and deceptive business
`practices in violation of (1) California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act, California
`Civil Code sections 1750, et seq.; (2) California’s False Advertising Law, California
`Business and Professions Code sections 17500, et seq.; (3) California’s Unfair
`Competition Law, California Business and Professions Code sections 17200, et seq.;
`(4) Negligent Misrepresentation; (5) Intentional Misrepresentation; and (6) Breach of
`Express Warranty, California Commercial Code sections 2313, et seq. in response to
`Defendants’ false and misleading promotion of its security products known as the
`Jobsite Security 5-Piece Starter Kit and Ring Protect Pro subscription.
`Defendants’ packaging, website, advertisements, and marketing materials
`2.
`associated with Defendant Ring’s Jobsite Security 5-Piece Starter Kit represents to
`consumers that Jobsite Security Kit, when used in conjunction with a Wi-Fi internet
`connection and a Pro Subscription with enrollment in “24/7 professional monitoring,”
`Defendant Ring will automatically “handle it” and “call the authorities and resolve it
`for you,” when in fact, the Jobsite Security Kit and Pro Subscription are not capable of
`this advertised functionality. Users must call authorities themselves or instruct
`Defendant Ring to do so when the users are prompted. Defendants effectively sold
`purchasers a “911 speed dial” button purchasers can press when purchasers see that
`their motion sensors have been triggered.
`II. NATURE OF THE ACTION
`Defendants Ring and Amazon manufacture, distribute, market, and sell
`3.
`the Jobsite Security 5-Piece Starter Kit (“Jobsite Security Kit”) to be used in
`
`- 1 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 4 of 36 Page ID #:4
`
`
`
`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
`28
`
`
`(“Pro
`
`conjunction with Defendant Ring’s Ring Protect Pro subscription
`Subscription”).
`Defendant Home Depot has partnered with Defendants Ring and Amazon
`4.
`to distribute, market, and sell this Jobsite Security Kit. The Jobsite Security Kit is
`available for purchase exclusively at Defendant Home Depot’s retail stores nationwide
`and via Defendant Home Depot’s website www.homedepot.com.1
`Since its release to customers in or around October 2021, the price for the
`5.
`Jobsite Security Kit has been $399.99, which includes an Alarm Pro Base Station,
`Stick Up Cam Battery, Motion Sensor, Spotlight Battery, and a Powered Case.
`Defendant Ring advertises the Jobsite Security Kit on its website as “a
`6.
`flexible security system for contractors that adds wifi to your site. Easily move the
`devices around. Take the system to different sites. And protect your valuable tools and
`materials from anywhere, anytime.2
`Defendant Ring’s website markets the Jobsite Security Kit as a device
`7.
`that allows you to “be on the job when you can’t be,” and to “[c]onnect to Ring security
`cameras, lights, and motion sensors to create an always-on security system, and
`control it all from the Ring App.” 3
`Defendant Ring offers the Pro Subscription, which is a no-contract
`8.
`subscription service available for use with the Jobsite Security Kit that permits
`subscribers to “[g]et notifications, see what’s happening in real-time, remotely activate
`your lights or security siren, and control all your Ring devices from one simple
`
`
`1 Purported affiliate Venue.com holds itself out as an authorized seller of the Jobsite
`Security Kit. (The Jobsite Security Kit “is authorized for sale under an affiliate
`agreement with Home Depot and shipped by Home Depot.”)
`https://venue.com/product/jobsite-security-5-piece-starter-kit/?utm_source=Google-
`Shopping&utm_medium=WP-cpc&utm_campaign=2022-WP-VENUE-
`2022&utm_source=google-
`ads&utm_campaign=utm%20smartshoppinggoogle&utm_agid=138281687430&utm
`_term=&creative=587433261022&device=c&placement=&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI74
`3n48Ld9gIVBR6tBh3X-ARSEAYYAiABEgKnkfD_BwE (last accessed March 23,
`2022).
`2 https://ring.com/jobsite-security (last accessed March 24, 2022).
`3 https://ring.com/jobsite-security (last accessed March 24, 2022).
`- 2 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 5 of 36 Page ID #:5
`
`
`
`dashboard in the Ring App.” 4 Defendant Ring markets the subscription as “a
`comprehensive subscription service that lets you review, share, and save every video
`and photo captured by your Ring device and opt-in to 24/7 professional monitoring.”5
`In reference to “24/7 professional monitoring,” Defendant Ring provides that “Ring
`Alarm Pro and Ring Alarm professional monitoring service is available only within
`the U.S. (all 50 states, but not U.S. territories). Ring does not own its own professional
`monitoring center. Additional charges may apply in areas that require permits or guard
`response service for alarm verification. Tax not included. Enrollment required.”6
`The current price for the Pro Subscription is $20 per month if purchased
`9.
`on a monthly basis or $200 per year with an annual purchase.
`10. The packaging of the Jobsite Security Kit also advertises that, when used
`in conjunction with a Wi-Fi internet connection and a Pro Subscription with
`enrollment in “24/7 professional monitoring,” Defendant Ring will “handle it” and
`“call the authorities and resolve it for you.2” Footnote 2 states in pertinent part, “Ring
`Alarm Pro and Ring Alarm professional monitoring service is available within the
`U.S. (all 50 states, but not U.S. territories). Ring does not own its own professional
`monitoring center. Additional charges may apply in areas that require permits or guard
`response service for alarm verification. Tax not included. Enrollment for Ring Protect
`Pro and opt-in for professional monitoring is required (each separately).” 7
`
`
`4 https://ring.com/protect-
`plans?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=833107590&utm_ter
`m=ring%20doorbell%20subscription%20plans&utm_content=66897173502&gclid=
`EAIaIQobChMInsLXpb3d9gIVmxitBh0t_QvmEAAYAiAAEgJTl_D_BwE&gclid=E
`AIaIQobChMInsLXpb3d9gIVmxitBh0t_QvmEAAYAiAAEgJTl_D_BwE (last
`accessed March 23, 2022).
`5 https://ring.com/protect-
`plans?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=833107590&utm_ter
`m=ring%20doorbell%20subscription%20plans&utm_content=66897173502&gclid=
`EAIaIQobChMInsLXpb3d9gIVmxitBh0t_QvmEAAYAiAAEgJTl_D_BwE&gclid=E
`AIaIQobChMInsLXpb3d9gIVmxitBh0t_QvmEAAYAiAAEgJTl_D_BwE (last
`accessed March 23, 2022).
`6 Id.
`7 https://ring.com/jobsite-security (last accessed March 24, 2022).
`- 3 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 6 of 36 Page ID #:6
`
`
`
`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
`28
`
`
`
`11. Defendant Ring advertises and misrepresents on its website that its Pro
`Subscription provides functionality that it knows it does not actually provide.
`Defendants are intentionally misrepresenting that the Jobsite Security Kit, when used
`with the Pro Subscription, will “call authorities” for users who have a triggering
`security event, when it knows that its Jobsite Security Kit does not actually contain
`any pieces that trigger police response.
`12. Defendant Home Depot’s websites states, “The Jobsite Security 5-Piece
`Starter Kit is a complete security system for contractors that connects to existing wifi
`or can create a mobile hotspot, generating a wifi network that has a 24/7 LTE internet
`connection (requires a Ring Protect Pro subscription).¹ Connect the Stick Up Cam
`Battery, Spotlight Battery, and Motion Sensor to the Alarm Pro Base Station to create
`an always-on security system that will protect your job site and valuable tools, and
`control it all from the Ring App. Easily move the devices around the job site or take
`the entire system to safeguard different sites.” The foregoing footnote 1 states, “Extra
`data charges may apply. Backup cellular data is provided by a third party carrier, and
`availability and speeds will vary. May require backup power if the power goes out.
`Visit ring.com/alarm-pro for more details. Ring Alarm Pro is designed to be used as
`a router, as using Ring Alarm Pro as an extender may impact your ability to utilize
`Ring Protect Pro features.”
`
`- 4 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 7 of 36 Page ID #:7
`
`
`
`13. Defendants’ advertising and marketing campaign is false, deceptive, and
`misleading because the Pro Subscription when used in conjunction with the Jobsite
`Security Kit does not actually automatically call authorities when the alarm is set and
`then the Motion Sensor is triggered and all other conditions precedent are satisfied.
`14. Defendants’ strategy to misrepresent the functionality and service of
`automatically contacting the police is not accidental. Defendants’ goal is to entice
`purchasers and subscribers of the Jobsite Security Kit and Pro Subscription into
`purchasing the equipment and subscription with the peace of mind that they will have
`an alarm system that contacts the police when the user is not at the jobsite. Theft from
`construction sites is a major problem of which Defendants are aware as Defendant
`Ring notes on its website, “Up to $1 billion a year is lost nationwide due to theft on
`job sites,” citing the 2015 Theft Report by the National Crime Information Bureau
`(NCIB).8 and Defendants’ Jobsite Security Kit and Pro Subscription are designed to
`combat by acting as a deterrent.
`15. When deciding to purchase the Jobsite Security Kit and Pro Subscription,
`Plaintiff and those similarly situated (“Class Members”) relied on Defendants’
`misrepresentation that their Jobsite Security Kit when used with the Pro Subscription
`would automatically contact authorities. Plaintiff and Class Members would not have
`purchased the Jobsite Security Kit and Pro Subscription absent Defendants’
`misrepresentation regarding the capability and functionality of the Jobsite Security Kit
`and Pro Subscription.
`16. Consequently, several of Defendants’ advertised claims are false and
`misleading.
`17. Plaintiff makes these allegations as follows upon personal knowledge as
`to Plaintiff’s own acts and experiences, and, as to all other matters, upon information
`and belief, including investigations conducted by Plaintiff’s attorneys.
`
`
`8 https://ring.com/jobsite-security (last accessed March 24, 2022).
`- 5 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 8 of 36 Page ID #:8
`
`
`
`18. Defendants’ nationwide sale and advertising of deceptively misbranded
`products constitutes: (1) violations of California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act
`(“CLRA”), Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1750, et seq.; (2) violations of California’s False
`Advertising Law (“FAL”), Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17500, et seq.; (3) violations of
`California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200, et seq.;
`(4) violations of consumer protection statutes of various other states; (5) negligent
`misrepresentation; (6) intentional misrepresentation; and (7) breach of express
`warranty, California Commercial Code §§ 2313, et. seq.
`19. This conduct caused Plaintiff and others similarly situated damages and
`requires restitution and injunctive relief to remedy and prevent further harm.
`20. Unless otherwise indicated, the use of Defendants’ name in this
`Complaint includes all agents, employees, officers, members, directors, heirs,
`successors, assigns, principals, trustees, sureties, subrogees, representatives and
`insurers of the named Defendants.
`III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`21. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter presented by this
`Complaint because it is a class action arising under the Class Action Fairness Act of
`2005 (“CAFA”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1332(d)(2), which confers original
`jurisdiction on federal courts over a class action with at least 100 putative class
`members, minimal diversity in which any member of the putative class is a citizen of
`a state different from any defendant, and in which the amount in controversy exceeds
`in the aggregate sum of $5,000,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs.
`22. Plaintiff alleges that there are at least 100 putative class members who
`purchased a Jobsite Security Kit and a corresponding Pro Subscription.
`23. Plaintiff alleges that the amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000.00,
`pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2) and (6).
` Plaintiff alleges that minimal diversity exists with members of the
`24.
`proposed class who are citizens of different states than Defendants Ring, Home Depot,
`
`- 6 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 9 of 36 Page ID #:9
`
`
`
`and Amazon.
`25. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Ring because Ring maintains
`headquarters in this District and operates in this District. Through its business
`operations in this District, Ring intentionally avails itself of the markets within this
`District to render the exercise of jurisdiction by this Court just and proper. This Court
`has personal jurisdiction over Home Depot because Home Depot operates multiple
`retail stores in this District and through its business operations in this District, Home
`Depot intentionally avails itself of the markets within this District to render the
`exercise of jurisdiction by this Court just and proper. This Court has personal
`jurisdiction over Amazon because Amazon operates multiple retail stores in this
`District and through its business operations in this District, Amazon intentionally
`avails itself of the markets within this District to render the exercise of jurisdiction by
`this Court just and proper. Additionally, as to all three Defendants—Ring, Home
`Depot, and Amazon—they sell their products to consumers who reside in this District
`through e-commerce channels.
`26. Venue within this District is proper because Defendant Ring is
`headquartered at 1523 26th Street Santa Monica, CA 90404 within this district, and
`Defendants Ring, Home Depot, and Amazon intentionally avail themselves of the
`markets within this District to render the exercise of jurisdiction by this Court just and
`proper, and the acts complained of occurred within this District.
`IV. PARTIES
`27. Plaintiff Alison White (“Ms. White”), is, and at all times relevant hereto
`was, an individual residing in Los Angeles County, California. Ms. White purchased
`and used Defendants’ Jobsite Security Kit and Pro Subscription in Los Angeles
`County, California.
`28. Defendant RING LLC (“Ring”) is a limited liability company organized
`under the laws of Delaware with its headquarters located at 1523 26th Street, Santa
`Monica, California 90404. Defendant Ring is a home security and smart home
`
`- 7 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 10 of 36 Page ID #:10
`
`
`
`company that designed and manufactured the Jobsite Security Kit and designed and
`provides the Pro Subscription. Defendant Ring created and/or authorized the false,
`misleading, and deceptive advertisements and packaging of the Jobsite Security Kit
`and Pro Subscription. Defendant Ring, directly and through its agents, has substantial
`contacts with and receives substantial benefits and income from and through the State
`of California and is headquartered in the State of California. Defendant Ring’s parent
`company is Defendant Amazon.
`29. Defendant AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC doing business as
`AMAZON.COM, INC. (“Amazon”) is a corporation organized under the laws of
`Delaware with its headquarters located at 410 Terry Avenue North, Seattle,
`Washington 98109. Defendant Amazon is the parent company of Defendant Ring.9
`Defendant Amazon created and/or authorized the false, misleading, and deceptive
`advertisements and packaging of the Jobsite Security Kit and Pro Subscription.
`Defendant Amazon, directly and through its agents, has substantial contacts with and
`receives substantial benefits and income from and through the State of California.
`30. Defendant THE HOME DEPOT, INC. (“Home Depot”) is a corporation
`organized under the laws of Delaware with its headquarters located at 2455 Paces
`Perry Road, Atlanta, Georgia 30339. Defendant is a large-scale home improvement
`retailer with almost 2,000 store locations and also sells its products online for shipment
`direct-to-customer or pickup in-store. Defendant Home Depot created and/or
`authorized the false, misleading, and deceptive advertisements and packaging of the
`Jobsite Security Kit, including representations about the Pro Subscription. Defendant
`Home Depot, directly and through its agents, has substantial contacts with and receives
`substantial benefits and income from and through the State of California.
`
`
`9 https://press.aboutamazon.com/news-releases/news-release-details/amazon-and-
`ring-close-acquisition-now-working-together-empower (last accessed March 30,
`2022).
`- 8 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 11 of 36 Page ID #:11
`
`
`
`V.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION
`31. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all of the above
`paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully stated herein.
`32. At all relevant times, Defendants have been, and continue to be, a
`“person” as that term is defined under California Business & Professions Code Section
`17021.
`In or around April 2018, Defendant Amazon acquired Defendant Ring.10
`33.
`34. On or about December 20, 2021, Ms. White purchased Defendant Ring’s
`Jobsite Security Kit from Defendant Home Depot’s website for in-store pickup for a
`total price of $399.99 plus tax of $41.00 ($440.99 in total).11 On December 21, 2021
`at 10:31 AM, Ms. White received email confirmation from Defendant Home Depot
`confirming that she picked up her Jobsite Security Kit from Defendant Home Depot’s
`Signal Hill store.
`35. On or about December 23, 2021, Ms. White subscribed to the Pro
`Subscription via Defendant Ring’s website and then received an email confirmation
`of her active subscription on December 24, 2021 at 1:29:09 AM PST. On or about
`December 23, 2021, Ms. White also activated the eero subscription that accompanied
`the Ring Alarm Pro in her Jobsite Security Kit.
`36. On or about December 24, 2021 between approximately 3:00 and 4:00
`p.m. PST, Ms. White installed the Jobsite Security Kit for her personal use at her
`residential jobsite located at 5981 West 74th Street, Los Angeles, California 90045
`(the “Residence”).
`
`
`10 https://press.aboutamazon.com/news-releases/news-release-details/amazon-and-
`ring-close-acquisition-now-working-together-empower (last accessed March 30,
`2022).
`11 Prior to discovering that the Jobsite Security Kit and Pro Subscription do not
`automatically contact authorities, Ms. White purchased and installed two additional
`Jobsite Security Kits and established Pro Subscriptions for those units for personal
`use at other jobsite locations in Los Angeles at the same prices set forth above.
`- 9 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 12 of 36 Page ID #:12
`
`
`
`37. On December 24, 2021 at approximately 3:22 p.m. PST, Ms. White
`caused permits from the City of Los Angeles to be obtained for the Residence for $43.
`38. On or about December 24, 2021 at 3:00 p.m. PST, Ms. White activated
`the Monitoring settings in her Ring smartphone application to “customize how Police
`Response is requested for an alarm at [her] location,” by requesting police response
`for “SOS, panic alarms, and burglar alarms triggered by door, window, or motion
`sensors when Ring Alarm is armed.” Ms. White chose the default option for Ring
`Monitoring to “request a police response if no one cancels the request for help.”
`39. On or about December 24, 2021, Ms. White set up and then tested the
`Jobsite Security Kit with the Pro Subscription on the Ring mobile phone application
`and confirmed that it was operational. To test functionality, Ms. White tested the
`security cameras to ensure they were recording motion, and tested the motion sensor
`by walking in front of it to make sure that it properly identified motion.
`40. On or about December 24, 2021 at 7:54 p.m. PST, Ms. White set the
`alarm to the “away” setting on her Ring mobile phone application to enable automatic
`police response in the event the Ring alarm was triggered while she was away.
`41. On or about December 25, 2021 at 2:52 AM PST, 25 hours after
`confirmation that Ms. White’s Pro Subscription was active, and 7 hours after arming
`the Ring alarm to “away,” someone broke into the Residence, repeatedly triggering
`the motion sensor. The Ring cameras recorded the break-in and the Ring app sent
`repeated motion alerts to Ms. White’s phone, but Ring did not contact the police in
`any fashion.
`42. Ms. White expected in this instance, while she was sleeping, that the
`triggered Ring Jobsite Security Kit would automatically contact the police to respond
`to the Residence because her Ring alarm system was set to “away,” she had obtained
`the necessary alarm permit, and she had enrolled in, and paid for, Ring’s Pro
`Subscription with professional monitoring, which promised that Ring would contact
`authorities for her if there was a triggering event.
`
`- 10 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 13 of 36 Page ID #:13
`
`
`
`In purchasing the Jobsite Security Kit and obtaining an eero subscription
`43.
`and a Pro Subscription, Ms. White reasonably relied on Defendants’ advertising and
`marketing representations that with the Pro Subscription, the Jobsite Security Kit
`would provide “24/7 professional monitoring” that would automatically “contact
`authorities” in the event the alarm was armed and there was an issue.
`44. Defendants seek to capture purchasers who desire a portable security
`system to secure their jobsites while they are not on-site by specifically advertising
`their “24/7 professional monitoring” service. To do so, Defendants have deceptively
`advertised the Jobsite Security Kit and Pro Subscription as a “professional
`monitoring” service that “contact[s] authorities and resolve[s] it for you” instead of
`representing that its Jobsite Security Kit, when used with the Pro Subscription, doesn’t
`actually automatically contact authorities. Rather the device with the subscription
`simply alerts users at the time the motion sensor has been triggered, letting the user
`who sees the alert decide in the moment whether the user would like to contact the
`authorities.
`45. At the time Plaintiff purchased Defendants’ Jobsite Security Kit and Pro
`Subscription and established an eero subscription, Plaintiff believed and relied upon
`Defendants’ representation that the Jobsite Security Kit with the Pro Subscription
`would automatically contact authorities if triggered while the alarm was set. Plaintiff
`did not believe she was effectively purchasing a sort of “speed-dial button” that would
`require her to “be on-call” and then call 911 herself through the Ring smartphone
`application, which is what Defendant Ring ultimately provided.
`46. Plaintiff reasonably believed Defendants’ marketing materials claiming
`that “We’ll Handle It” and “If there’s an issue, we’ll call authorities and resolve it for
`you when you enroll in 24/7 professional monitoring,” and purchased the Jobsite
`Security Kit for that reason, believing that if she were “away” when the motion sensor
`was triggered, then Defendant Ring would automatically call authorities for her, even
`when she wasn’t in a position to respond to the phone alerts.
`
`- 11 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 14 of 36 Page ID #:14
`
`
`
`47. Defendants knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care, should have
`known that their Jobsite Security Kit with the Pro Subscription were not capable of
`automatically contacting authorities and thus that its advertising materials were
`misleading or false.
`48. As a consequence of Defendants’ unfair and deceptive advertising and
`manufacturing practices, Plaintiff and other consumers similarly situated purchased
`and overpaid for Defendants’ Jobsite Security Kit and Pro Subscription under the false
`impression that the Pro Subscription would automatically contact authorities when all
`conditions precedent were satisfied.
`49. Plaintiff and other consumers similarly situated purchased and overpaid
`for Defendants’ Jobsite Security Kit, eero subscription, and Pro Subscription due to
`Defendants’ misrepresentations.
`50. Had Plaintiff had been aware that the Jobsite Security Kit with internet
`and the Pro Subscription alone were in fact not capable of automatically contacting
`authorities, Plaintiff would not have purchased these three kits, or would have paid
`less for them.
`51. Plaintiff and others similarly situated were exposed to and relied upon the
`same material misrepresentations made on Defendants’ packaging, website,
`advertisements, and marketing materials.
`52. As a result of Defendants’ false and misleading statements, Plaintiff and
`other similarly situated consumers purchased thousands, if not tens of thousands, of
`Defendants’ Jobsite Security Kit, eero subscription, and Pro Subscription and have
`suffered, and continue to suffer, injury in fact through the loss of money and/or
`property.
`53. This action seeks, among other things, public injunctive relief, restitution
`of all amounts illegally obtained, and disgorgement of any and all ill-gotten gains as a
`result of the misconduct alleged herein.
`
`- 12 -
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`28
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-06909 Document 1 Filed 09/23/22 Page 15 of 36 Page ID #:15
`
`
`
` CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
`VI.
`54. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all of the above
`paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully stated herein.
`55. Plaintiff brings this action individually and on behalf of all others
`similarly situated against Defendants under Rule 23(a), (b)(2), and