A gender discrimination lawsuit against Sony has run into significant hurdles. Axios has learned that judge Laurel Beeler dismissed 10 of plaintiff Emma Majo's 13 claims due to multiple issues. Majo didn't provide enough evidence to make a case in some instances, Beeler said, while in others she incorrectly asserted that promotions and demotions constituted harassment.

Majo first sued Sony in November over allegations of institutional discrimination. The former PlayStation security analyst accused Sony of firing her for discussing sexism she reportedly encountered at the company. Sony tried to have the suit tossed out due to both vague details and a lack of corroborating claims, but the case gathered momentum in March when eight other women joined in and raised the potential for class action status.

The judge will still allow three claims surrounding wrongful termination and violations of whistleblower protections, however, and she rejected Sony's attempt to block any chance of class action status. As the other claims were dismissed without prejudice, Majo is free to revisit them if and when she can better support them.

Sony denied Majo's discrimination allegations, but it also said in March that it would take the women's complaints "seriously." As it stands, the partial dismissal clearly isn't what the company wanted — it still has to face potentially grave implications, and may be pressured to join companies like Activision Blizzard in reforming its internal culture.

A California judge today granted Activision’s motion to dismiss a class-action lawsuit filed by investors who asserted the company misled them about sexual harassment allegations at the company, including probes by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH). First reported by Bloomberg Law, the judge ruled that the plaintiffs failed to meet the threshold to pursue their claims under federal securities law.

First filed in August 2021 by a group of individual investors that includes Jeff Ross and Gary Cheng, they allege the EEOC and DFEH probes were intentionally downplayed by Activision in SEC filings, which calling them “routine”. But the judge argued these investors' claims to be an example of “fraud-by-hindsight,” wherein companies which suffer bad outcomes are unfairly accused of having been able to predict them.

“Plaintiffs contend that the media’s reaction to news of the regulatory investigations and Defendants’ statement in response to the DFEH Action 'belies any notion' that the regulatory investigations were ordinary or routine. But such allegations constitute 'fraud-by-hindsight' and absent particularized, temporal facts, are insufficient to support a claim of securities fraud,” wrote Judge Percy Anderson of the US District Court of the Central District of California.

A US district court recently approved an $18 million dollar settlement between the videogame company and the EEOC. The lawsuit by California’s DFEH is still pending. While the motion to dismiss is a setback for the investors, they have 30 days to file an amended complaint.

Apple Store employees attempting to form a union at the company’s flagship Grand Central Terminal location in New York City want the tech giant to pay workers at least $30 per hour. According to CNBC, the group leading the effort, Fruit Stand Workers United, made the request on Monday in an update posted to its website.

“For pay, we seek a minimum $30 for all workers, built up on a matrix based on role, tenure and performance,” the group said. “For benefits, we seek more robust changes, like increased tuition reimbursement, faster accrued and more vacation time, and better retirement options, including higher match rates for 401(k) and enrollment into pension plans.”

According to TheWashington Post, the first outlet to report on the Grand Central Terminal unionization effort, Apple pays retail employees between $17 and up to $30 per hour, depending on their role, experience and location. “We are fortunate to have incredible retail team members and we deeply value everything they bring to Apple,” the company said. “We are pleased to offer very strong compensation and benefits for full time and part time employees, including health care, tuition reimbursement, new parental leave, paid family leave, annual stock grants and many other benefits.”

Organizers with Fruit Stand Workers United recently began collecting signatures from their co-workers. If at least 30 percent of the approximately 270 eligible employees at the store express interest in forming a union, the group can file with the National Labor Relations Board to hold an election. At least three other stores are attempting to form a union, according to The Post.

At the start of the year, Apple announced it would offer additional benefits to all of its US retail employees. As of April 4th, the company’s expanded benefits include increased vacation and sick days, paid parental leave and more. Like many other retailers throughout the pandemic, Apple has had a time tough hiring and retaining frontline workers. Over that same period, the company’s retail employees have complained of difficult working conditions, including issues with low pay, stressful workloads due to staffing shortages and poor morale.

DC Attorney General Karl Racine has filed a motion (PDF) asking the court to reconsider its decision to dismiss the antitrust lawsuit he filed against Amazon in 2021. In the original lawsuit, Racine accused the e-commerce giant of "illegally abusing and maintaining its monopoly power by controlling prices across the online retail market." Third-party sellers that use Amazon's Marketplace have to abide by the company's agreement, which includes a fair pricing policy. If they sell their goods for lower prices elsewhere, Amazon could remove their items' buy box, suspend their shipment option and even terminate their selling privileges for "serious or repeated cases."

The company stopped telling sellers back in 2019 in the midst of antitrust scrutiny that they couldn't sell their products for cheaper prices elsewhere. However, the company later added back a clause under its fair pricing policy that's nearly identical. Racine argued that since sellers price their goods with Amazon's cut in mind, the policy artificially raises prices even on sellers' own websites and on competing e-commerce platforms. 

Amazon told us when Racine first filed the lawsuit that the Attorney General had it "exactly backwards." The spokesperson said: "Amazon takes pride in the fact that we offer low prices across the broadest selection, and like any store we reserve the right not to highlight offers to customers that are not priced competitively. The relief the AG seeks would force Amazon to feature higher prices to customers, oddly going against core objectives of antitrust law." The Superior Court of the District of Columbia sided with Amazon and threw out Racine's complaint back in March. 

Now, the DC AG wants another chance at proving that Amazon violated antitrust laws. His office's amended complaint includes additional details about how the company's policy violates DC code, mostly focusing on how it "causes prices to District residents to be higher than they otherwise would be" and how it inhibits sellers from competing with Amazon's own products. 

Racine said in a statement about the motion he filed:

"We're asking the court to reconsider its decision to dismiss our Amazon case because the antitrust laws and facts are on our side and we are determined to continue standing up for DC consumers. Amazon illegally uses its market power to prevent sellers from lowering their prices on other platforms — including their own. This results in higher prices for DC consumers."

Vape pen maker Juul has agreed to settle another state lawsuit alleging that it targeted minors with its marketing. It will pay $22.5 million and undertake measures to prevent underage use and sales to settle a suit filed by Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson in September 2020. Juul admits no wrongdoing under the settlement, though it told the Associated Press the agreement marked “another step in our ongoing effort to reset our company and resolve issues from the past.”

The AG claimed that when Juul debuted in 2015, it promoted itself with colorful ads on social media, leading to an increase in nicotine use and addiction in teens. Ferguson also claimed in the filing that the company deceived consumers about the addictiveness of its product. His office said the money from Juul's settlement will be used to establish a health equity unit that will "respond to deceptive and discriminatory health care practices that disproportionately impact vulnerable communities and communities of color."

Under the consent decree, Juul is not allowed to promote its products on social media and can't use advertising that appeals to youths. It agreed to monitor and report social media posts from underage users about its products and to require an adult's signature when delivering products that it sells online. Additionally, it must run a secret shopper program in the state for at least two years to ensure retailers aren't selling its products to underage users.

Over the last year, Juul has settled several cases brought by state AGs. It agreed to pay $40 million to settle a case in North Carolina and $14.5 million to settle one in Arizona. The company says it has also resolved a suit in Louisiana but lawsuits in several otherstates remain active. “We will continue working with federal and state stakeholders to advance a fully regulated, science-based marketplace for vapor products,” the company said.

US District Judge William Orrick has rejected Tesla's argument that it isn't liable to Owen Diaz, according to The Wall Street Journal and Reuters. Diaz is a former Black Tesla worker who accused the company of turning a blind eye to the racial abuse he suffered while working at its Fremont, California factory from 2015 to 2016. Last year, a jury ruled in favor of Diaz and awarded him $6.9 million in compensatory damages, as well as $130 million in punitive damages. Orrick has affirmed the jury's verdict but reduced the award to $15 million.

To be exact, he reduced the compensatory damages awarded to Diaz to $1.5 million from $6.9 million, which he called "excessive." He also slashed the "unconstitutionally large" punitive damages award from $130 million to $13.5 million. Punitive damages awarded by courts are meant to punish a defendant and deter them from repeating their actions — or, in Tesla's case, from allegedly ignoring the racial abuse of a Black worker. Tesla has a market value exceeding $1 trillion, however, and $13.5 million is a drop in the bucket for the automaker. Diaz's lawyer said they plan to appeal the lowered damages award.

Nevertheless, Judge Orrick agreed that Tesla showed a "striking" indifference to Diaz's plight. In his original lawsuit, Diaz said he wasn't just subjected to racial slurs, fellow workers (and even one supervisor) also left drawings of swastika and racist graffiti around the plant. He said Tesla's management neglected to halt the abuse. Judge Orrick wrote in his ruling:

"Not only does the evidence support a finding of recklessness or indifference to Diaz’s health and safety, it supports a finding that Tesla intentionally built an employment structure that allowed it to take advantage of Diaz’s (and others’) labor for its benefit while attempting to avoid any of the obligations and responsibilities that employers owe employees."

Tesla has faced several racial discrimination lawsuits over the years other than Diaz's, with workers claiming that they were subjected to constant racial abuse in its factories. In February, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing filed a lawsuit against the automaker after finding evidence that its "Fremont factory is a racially segregated workplace" where Black workers are discriminated against. Tesla denied the accusation, saying it "opposes all forms of discrimination and harassment" and that it has a "dedicated Employee Relations team that responds to and investigates all complaints."

A former lawyer with California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing has accused Governor Gavin Newsom of interfering with the agency’s sexual harassment lawsuit against Activision Blizzard. According to an email seen by Bloomberg, DFEH assistant chief counsel Melanie Proctor said Tuesday she was resigning her position to protest the abrupt firing of Janette Wipper, the watchdog’s chief counsel.

“The Office of the Governor repeatedly demanded advance notice of litigation strategy and of next steps in the litigation,” Proctor writes in her resignation. “As we continued to win in state court, this interference increased, mimicking the interests of Activision’s counsel.” Proctor alleges Wipper was “abruptly terminated” for attempting to protect the DFEH’s independence. According to the email, the former chief counsel is considering “all avenues of legal recourse,” including a claim under California’s Whistleblower Protection Act.

We’ve reached out to the Office of Governor Newsom for comment.

News of the resignation comes little more than two weeks after a federal judge ordered Activision Blizzard to pay $18 million to settle a US Equal Opportunity Commission lawsuit accusing the publisher of fostering a discriminatory workplace. Before that complaint was filed, California's fair employment agency launched its own lawsuit against Activision Blizzard following a two-year investigation into sexual harassment allegations at the publisher. The DFEH case is currently scheduled to go to trial in February 2023, but the allegations put forward by Proctor are likely to raise questions about the ultimate fate of the lawsuit.

Elon Musk has only been Twitter’s largest shareholder for a few weeks, but he’s already facing a class action lawsuit over his handling of the investment. A Twitter shareholder has filed a class action lawsuit against Musk over his 11-day delay in officially disclosing his investment in Twitter to the SEC.

Under securities law, Musk was required to file paperwork with the SEC by March 24th — 10 days after his stake in Twitter grew to 5 percent — but he didn’t do so until April 4th. That delay might not sound particularly significant, but it may have netted him as much as $156 million. According to the lawsuit, those gains came at the expense of other shareholders, who were not able to similarly profit.

“Investors who sold shares of Twitter stock between March 24, 2022, when Musk was required to have disclosed his Twitter ownership, and before the actual April 4, 2022 disclosure, missed the resulting share price increase as the market reacted to Musk’s purchases and were damaged thereby,” the lawsuit states.

According to the shareholder who brought the suit, he and other investors sold shares at “artificially deflated” prices as a result of Musk’s actions. The suit also alleges that Musk made “materially false and misleading statements and omissions by failing to disclose to investors that he had acquired a 5% ownership stake in Twitter as required.”

The lawsuit comes after a chaotic few days for Twitter and Musk. The Tesla CEO and noted Twitter troll had initially agreed to join Twitter’s board of directors, much to the dismay of some employees. But the decision was abruptly reversed following several days of characteristically bizarre tweets from Musk, who polled his Twitter followers whether the company should change its name, and speculated on whether the service was “dying.”

In an email to employees, Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal noted that as a board member Musk would have been a "fiduciary of the company, where he, like all board members has to act in the best interest of the company and all our shareholders.” He added that he believed it was “for the best” that Musk ultimately wouldn’t take the position.

Activision Blizzard has recruited a new chief diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) officer. Kristen Hines will join the company and its senior leadership team on April 25th. She will report to Julie Hodges, the company's chief people officer. Hines most recently led the Global DEI practice at Accenture, where she helped other organizations bolster their DEI strategies and capabilities.

One of Hines' key responsibilities will be to help Activision Blizzard meet its commitment to increase the percentage of women and non-binary people in the workforce by 50 percent over the next five years. In its representation data document for 2021, the company said women made up 24 percent of its workforce. Hines will also work with Activision Blizzard's gaming teams “to ensure diverse and inclusive perspectives are included in game design, including storylines, character development, gameplay and community interaction.”

"In an industry with historical underrepresentation, I’m looking forward to leading the company’s efforts to further build a workplace that values transparency, equity and inclusivity,” Hines said in a statement. “Gaming has amazing potential to connect communities around the world and showcase heroes from all backgrounds. I am looking forward to playing a part in expanding the landscape of talent who brings these compelling experiences to a broad base of players.”

Hines will be tasked with helping improve the workplace culture of Activision Blizzard, which has been under intense scrutiny since last summer. The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing sued the company in July. It accused Activision Blizzard of fostering a "frat boy culture" and alleged there was discrimination against female employees. A wrongful death suit was filed against the publisher last month, as was a sexual harassment and discrimination lawsuit from an individual plaintiff.

Also in March, a judge approved a proposal by Activision Blizzard, which is the subject of a pending $68.7 billion takeover from Microsoft, to set up an $18 million fund to settle a federal lawsuit. The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's suit accused the company of enabling a sexist and discriminatory workplace environment.

Activision Blizzard is converting all of its temporary and contingent quality assurance contractors in the US to full-time employees. Many of the 1,100 workers will receive a pay rise — the minimum hourly rate is going up to $20 per hour.

Developing...