If every district court judge were as conscientious as Judge Alsup, there would be no need for the Center for Class Action Fairness. A class action alleged that the Asus design had resulted in interference with GPS and WiFi. Asus offers a "dongle" for free to customers dissatisfied with the issue, so when the class settled for "$17 plus a free dongle" for class members who made claims, with no liability to the defendant for class members who did not make claims, the district court was not impressed. [Fraser v. Asus Computer (N.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2012); h/t A.S.]
Fraser v. Asus Computer
Related Entries:
- Blessing v. Sirius XM en banc petitions
- Request for assistance: In re Citigroup Securities Litigation
- Second Circuit "punts" in Blessing v. Sirius
- Pecover v. Electronic Arts class action settlement objection
- CCAF objects to Easy Saver coupon settlement
- Blessing v. Sirius XM Second Circuit argument tomorrow morning
- Briefing complete in In re Online DVD Antitrust Lit. (9th Cir.)
- Amgen, Johnson & Johnson, Bernstein Litowitz, and the fraud on the market theory
- HP Inkjet oral argument
- Opening brief in Kitagawa v. Apple (9th Cir.)
- Wyly v. Weiss: speaking of lack of marginal deterrence value of civil litigation...
- Dennings v. Clearwire Corporation class action settlement
- Why is there a single settlement class in the $2.43 billion Bank of America settlement?
- More on Texas anti-coupon law
![]() |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
| Laura Eyi Press Officer, Manhattan Institute leyi@manhattan-institute.org |




Leave a comment
Once submitted, the comment will first be reviewed by our editors and is not guaranteed to be published. Point of Law editors reserve the right to edit, delete, move, or mark as spam any and all comments. They also have the right to block access to any one or group from commenting or from the entire blog. A comment which does not add to the conversation, runs of on an inappropriate tangent, or kills the conversation may be edited, moved, or deleted.
The views and opinions of those providing comments are those of the author of the comment alone, and even if allowed onto the site do not reflect the opinions of Point of Law bloggers or the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research or any employee thereof. Comments submitted to Point of Law are the sole responsibility of their authors, and the author will take full responsibility for the comment, including any asserted liability for defamation or any other cause of action, and neither the Manhattan Institute nor its insurance carriers will assume responsibility for the comment merely because the Institute has provided the forum for its posting.