A Ninth Circuit ruling examines website exposure in Tesla’s FSD litigation. Learn why class certification differs from a decision on liability.
On October 16, 2026, the Ninth Circuit vacated certification of three classes in LoSavio v. Tesla, Inc. and remanded for further proceedings. The lawsuit alleges misrepresentations about vehicle hardware capabilities associated with Full Self-Driving packages. The ruling did not resolve whether the advertising was deceptive.1
Why website exposure mattered
The panel rejected an inference that purchasers encountered the challenged statement on Tesla’s website. Visiting the relevant webpage was not a required purchasing step, and the traffic evidence did not establish classwide exposure.2
The court distinguished this record from circumstances supporting inferred exposure, including extensive advertising campaigns or standardized materials ordinarily provided to purchasers.2
Individualized exposure questions also affected limitations defenses. The related injunctive-relief class could not stand because its membership depended on the improperly certified damages classes.3
What the decision does—and does not—mean
The court vacated certification, not the underlying claims, and declined to address the proposed damages model.1
The memorandum is unpublished and nonprecedential except as permitted by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. It should not be treated as a new binding rule categorically barring website-based class actions.4
Practical considerations for businesses
As a practical recordkeeping measure, businesses should consider preserving dated versions of product descriptions, advertisements, and purchase flows. Those records can help counsel evaluate what was communicated, when, and to whom.
For businesses evaluating a dispute over commercial representations, identifying the actual statements and supporting records is a useful starting point for a legal assessment.
Scope note: This article summarizes the October 16 memorandum; subsequent docket developments have not been verified.
Mahrouyan Law, P.C. advises businesses on commercial disputes. Learn more about our Small Business & Commercial Litigation practice.
General information only; not legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Footnotes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
Omeed Mahrouyan is the founder of Mahrouyan Law, P.C., a California firm handling business and commercial litigation, property and cargo damage claims, personal injury, landlord representation, startup transactions, and practical intellectual property matters. Clients work directly with him on strategy, drafting, and case decisions.
More about Omeed Mahrouyan →