In re Toyota RAV4 Hybrid Fuel Tank Litig.
| Decision Date | 09 April 2021 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 20-cv-00337-EMC |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of California |
| Parties | IN RE TOYOTA RAV4 HYBRID FUEL TANK LITIGATION. |
This putative consumer class action is brought by thirty-six plaintiffs ("Plaintiffs") from twenty-eight states on behalf of a nationwide class of "[a]ll persons who purchased or leased" 2019 and 2020 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid vehicles ("Vehicle[s]"), as well as twenty-eight subclasses based on the state in which the Vehicles were purchased or leased. See Docket No. 55 ("Compl.") ¶¶ 84-85. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. ( "Toyota" or "TMS") falsely represented in marketing and ownership materials that the Vehicles' fuel tank capacity is 14.5 gallons when it is actually 8-11 gallons, thus significantly reducing the Vehicles' range on a single tank of gas. Plaintiffs bring ninety state-law claims against Toyota for breach of express warranty, breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, violations of various consumer protection and unfair competition statutes, and unjust enrichment. Plaintiffs seek damages as well as injunctive and declaratory relief.
Pending before the Court is Toyota's motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' consolidated class action complaint on the grounds that Plaintiffs lack Article III standing, that they fail to state claims for relief under Rule 12(b)(6), that they lack standing for injunctive and declaratory relief, and that they cannot pursue their claims as a nationwide class. The Court previously ruled on a number of these issues at the motion hearing of December 18, 2020; it here reiterates those conclusions and resolves the issues it declined to decide at the hearing. For the reasons given below, Toyota's motion to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
The facts alleged in Plaintiffs' consolidated class action complaint are straightforward. Toyota "is a manufacturer and distributor of new motor vehicles"; it "markets and advertises" RAV4 Hybrids, oversees Toyota dealers, and develops the company's nationwide marketing and informational materials." Compl. ¶ 2. Plaintiffs allege that "Toyota advertises and represents in its promotional materials, specifications, and owner's manual that the RAV4's fuel tank capacity is 14.5 gallons" and that the Vehicles' "total mileage range is 580 miles." Id. ¶ 3. Toyota, however, "failed to disclose that the RAV4s will not accept a full tank of fuel" and are in fact capable of holding only 8-11 gallons of fuel. Id. ¶ 3, 63. Plaintiffs point to "[n]ews reports, customer complaints, and Toyota's own statements" as showing "that the RAV4s' fuel tank shape prevents a full fuel tank refill by up to several gallons" such that "the vehicles' mileage range on a full tank of fuel is approximately 330-480 miles." Id. ¶¶ 3-4 (emphasis removed). Plaintiffs thus allege that they "have "suffered diminished market value of their RAV4 vehicles as a direct result of Toyota withholding material information and/or making misleading statements regarding the RAV4's fuel tank capacity and mileage range." Id. ¶ 5.
This case is brought on behalf of thirty-six plaintiffs from twenty-eight states, including California, Florida, New York, and Texas.1 Id. While the details of Plaintiffs' allegations occasionally vary, the essentials of their accounts are consistent. Each argues that he "believed and relied upon Toyota's representations that the RAV4's fuel tank capacity was 14.5 gallons" with "a combined 40 MPG rating," and that its "mile range [was] approximately 580 miles"; that "Toyota's representations were material" to him; that he "purchased his RAV4 in part because ofthe long distance he expected to be able to travel on a single tank of fuel"; that he discovered shortly after purchase or lease "that the vehicle will only accept approximately [8-11] gallons of fuel when the tank is nearly empty," resulting in a mileage range of only 330-480 miles; that this defect caused him "to make more frequent trips to refuel his RAV4 than he should have been required to based on Toyota's misrepresentation," and that he has "suffered actual damages in the form of the diminished value of his RAV4," as well as "more frequent fueling" and "future attempted repairs." See, e.g., Compl. ¶ 6; see also id. ¶¶ 7-39. Each plaintiff concludes by alleging that had he "known the actual fuel tank capacity and mileage range prior to his purchase, he would either not have purchased the RAV4 or would have paid less for it." See id.
The complaint further alleges that Toyota's guarantees about the Vehicles' fuel-tank size, mileage range, and/or miles-per-gallon ("MPG") estimates are included on the company's website (id. ¶¶ 47-49), in the Vehicles' owner's manual (id. ¶ 50), on the "Monroney" sticker displayed in the Vehicles' windows prior to purchase (id. ¶ 51), in the 2019 RAV4 marketing brochure (id. ¶ 55), and in video advertisements (id. ¶¶ 56-57). In the latter two instances, TMS also incorporated the marketing slogan and boasted that the Vehicles' drivers will make "fewer trips to the pump." Id. ¶¶ 55, 57. Plaintiffs also note that RAV4's hybrid model has a suggested retail price that is "nearly $2000 higher than the non-hybrid model." Id. ¶ 59. Moreover, the Vehicles come with an express warranty—the "New Vehicle Limited Warranty" ("NVLW")—that covers "repairs and adjustments needed to correct defects in materials or workmanship of any part supplied by Toyota." Id. ¶ 60-61 (quoting Docket No. 66-2 ("Landis Decl."), Ex. 2 at 13).
Plaintiffs further allege that, as of September 2020, "more than 200 complaints have been filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ('NHTSA') regarding 'fuel/propulsion system' issues with the 2019/2020 RAV4," all of which are substantially similar to Plaintiffs' allegations in the instant case. Id. ¶ 65; see also id. ¶¶ 65-69 (quoting NHTSA complaints). Plaintiffs also charge that "[t]housands of RAV4 owners have logged similar complaints on online forums and discussions" and that some "have even posted videos to youtube.com, filming their refuels." Id. ¶ 70, 74.
The complaint next asserts that "[a]t least as early as November 5, 2019, Toyota knew about the RAV4's fuel tank" problems. Id. ¶ 75. On that date, TMS "notified at least some Toyota service providers" about the issue via a "Toyota Tech Tip," noting that the "[c]oncern is under investigation." Id. ¶ 76. In late December 2019, an article in the trade publication Automotive News reported complaints among Vehicle owners that the Vehicles could only hold approximately 11 gallons of gasoline and so could not "get anywhere close to the 580 miles of expected range." Id. ¶ 78. In response to the article, TMS confirmed that it was "investigating a fuel tank shape issue on certain RAV4 Hybrid vehicles," where "variations in fuel tank shape may prevent a full refill by up to several gallons." Id. ¶ 79 (emphasis removed). As plaintiffs point out, the article also noted that Toyota had "changed the design of its fuel tank" starting with the 2019 RAV4 Hybrid model. Id. ¶ 80. In February 2020, the Fox television affiliate for the Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas, area also reported on the Vehicles' "[g]as tank design flaw," "detailing complaints by RAV4 purchasers throughout the country." Id. ¶ 81. In response, Toyota again confirmed that it was investigating the problem and theorized that "variations in fuel tank shape may prevent a full refill by up to several gallons." Id. ¶ 82. In a follow-up segment that same month, the Fox affiliate reported that Toyota "would offer RAV4 owners an 'interim fix' for the fuel tank issues until a final remedy is identified"; Toyota acknowledged, however, that this fix "may not prevent the condition from recurring." Id. ¶ 83 (emphasis removed).
As part of its motion to dismiss, Toyota observes that Plaintiffs "do not allege that the Environmental Protection Agency ('EPA')-estimated Miles Per Gallon ('MPG') numbers are false, and admit that, even with the alleged defect, the vehicles have a range of approximately 330-480 miles." Docket No. 66-1 ("Mot.") at 3 . Toyota also notes that Plaintiffs do not "identify any advertisement or representation by TMS that [they specifically] reviewed and relied on regarding mileage range." Id. at 6 (emphasis removed). Toyota goes on:
None of [the Plaintiffs] allege that they have been unable to drive their RAV4 Hybrid vehicles, or that they have run out of gas. Nor do Plaintiffs allege any physical injury or that they have incurred any out-of-pocket losses as a result of repairs (or otherwise) regarding the alleged defect. . . . [With one exception,] [n]one of thePlaintiffs allege that they attempted to re-sell their vehicles and received less value for their vehicles than they would have absent the alleged defect.2
Id. Finally, TMS observes that eighteen of the thirty-six plaintiffs fail to allege that they presented their vehicles for repair to an authorized Toyota dealership after discovering the fuel-tank defect. Id. at 13 .
Plaintiffs originally filed a class action complaint on January 15, 2020. Docket No. 1. Over the following months, several cases from elsewhere in this District were related to, and eventually consolidated with, the instant case. See, e.g., Docket Nos. 37 and 53. Pursuant to these developments, Plaintiffs filed their 198-page consolidated class action complaint on September 14, 2020. See Compl. Toyota's motion to dismiss followed on October 14, 2020. See Mot. Plaintiffs then submitted an opposition brief on November 4, 2020. See Docket No. 69 ("Opp'n"). Following a brief continuation of the motion hearing, Toyota filed its reply brief on November 25, 2020. See Docket No. 75 ("Reply")....
To continue reading
Request your trial