Heather Moser is an associate in the firm’s Consumer Litigation and Class Action Practice Group, recently voted #1 preferred counsel for class action defense in GC California Magazine. She has a diverse commercial litigation practice with a focus on consumer class actions in federal and state courts nationwide. Ms. Moser defends Fortune 500 technology companies in both product defect and fraud class actions. Ms. Moser also represents financial institutions in consumer class actions. In addition to class actions, Ms. Moser handles complex litigation matters for technology, real estate, and insurance companies.

Ms. Moser has a broad range of litigation experience, including briefing and arguing a variety of dispositive motions and managing multi-district litigation. Ms. Moser’s litigation practice includes substantive trial and appellate experience. She was the lead associate in a class action jury trial in San Francisco Superior Court on behalf of Bank of America. She was one of the lead attorneys in a federal bench trial in the Northern District of California. Ms. Moser also has experience at the appellate level briefing complex jurisdictional and constitutional issues in California state and federal appellate courts.

Ms. Moser is committed to pro bono work and is a recipient of the State Bar of California’s Wiley W. Manuel Award. Her efforts include representing veterans seeking mental health care from the Department of Veterans Affairs in the highly publicized Veterans for Common Sense v. Peake case. She briefed, argued, and obtained a favorable 42-page opinion denying the United States Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss Peake on jurisdictional, statutory, and constitutional grounds. She has also worked with Swords to Plowshares, a veterans’ rights organization. Additionally, Ms. Moser has drafted briefs at the federal district court and appellate levels in constitutional litigation regarding medical privacy.

Ms. Moser obtained a B.A. in American Government from the University of Virginia in 1997. She received her J.D. from the University of Texas at Austin in 2000 with honors and was named Chancellor, a designation reserved for the top 16 students. Following her graduation from law school, Ms. Moser obtained a Master’s degree in public international law from l’Institut Universitaire de Hautes Etudes Internationales in Geneva, Switzerland, and simultaneously interned in the Legal Affairs Division of the World Trade Organization. Ms. Moser is fluent in French.

Consumer Class Actions – Selected Products/Fraud Matters

• Smartphone Litigation – Represent smartphone manufacturer in multiple federal class actions alleging misrepresentations regarding data speed and connectivity (pending).
• Digital Music Player Litigation – Represented a digital music player manufacturer in multiple class actions (federal MDL actions and coordinated California state actions) alleging that the music player develops cosmetic defects during use and asserting false advertising, product defect, breach of warranty, and other claims. The cases settled on a nationwide class basis prior to class certification.
• In re: Digital Music Player Battery Cases – Represented a digital music player manufacturer in coordinated consumer class actions alleging product defects, false advertising, violations of California Business and Professions Code § 17200 and § 17500, violations of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and other claims regarding the battery. The cases settled on a nationwide class basis prior to class certification.
• Computer Display Litigation – Represented a computer display manufacturer in a consumer class action filed in Los Angeles Superior Court (Complex Division) alleging false advertising and product defects with respect to certain flat-panel displays.

Consumer Class Actions – Selected Financial Services Matters

• Miller v. Bank of America – A class of Social Security recipients using the Bank’s direct deposit feature alleged fraud, misrepresentation, and violation of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, seeking over $2 billion in damages. Over vigorous objection, the jury was instructed that using Social Security funds to pay overdraft and other fees was illegal. The jury rendered defense verdicts on all but one claim and refused to award punitive damages. Based on the trial court’s contested instruction, the First District Court of Appeal reversed and agreed that the Bank’s conduct was lawful. The California Supreme Court has accepted review.

Selected Media

• “ Group Sues to Make VA Give Soldiers Mental Care ,” NPR, March 3, 2008.
• “ In Federal Suit, 2 Views of Veterans’ Heath Care ,” New York Times, April 22, 2008.