Redbox 2011 Annual Report Download - page 28

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 28 of the 2011 Redbox annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 106

  • 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
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106

California’s Song-Beverly Credit Card Act of 1971 (“Song-Beverly”) with respect to the collection and recording
of consumer personal identification information, and violated the California Business and Professions Code
§ 17200 based on the alleged violation of Song-Beverly. A similar complaint alleging violations of Song-Beverly
and the right to privacy generally was filed in March 2011 in the Superior Court of the State of California,
County of Alameda, by a California resident, John Sinibaldi. A third similar complaint alleging only a violation
of Song-Beverly, was filed in March 2011 in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Diego,
by a California resident, Richard Schiff. Plaintiffs are seeking compensatory damages and civil penalties,
injunctive relief, attorneys’ fees, costs of suit, and interest. Redbox removed the Mehrens case to the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California, the Sinibaldi case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California, and the Schiff case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The Sinibaldi
case was subsequently transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, where the
Mehrens case is pending, and these two cases have been consolidated. At the same time, the plaintiffs substituted
Nicolle DiSimone as the named plaintiff in the Mehrens case. After Redbox filed a motion to dismiss, stay, or
transfer, the Schiff case was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California but has not
been consolidated with the Mehrens case. Redbox moved to dismiss the DiSimone/Sinibaldi case, and DiSimone/
Sinibaldi moved for class certification. In January 2012, the Court granted Redbox’s motion to dismiss with
prejudice and denied DiSimone/Sinibaldi’s motion for class certification as moot. Plaintiffs have until February
2012 to appeal. We believe that the claims against us are without merit and intend to defend ourselves vigorously
in this matter. Currently, no accrual has been established as it is not possible to estimate the possible loss or range
of loss because this matter had not advanced to a stage where we could make any such estimate.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not applicable.
20