Rita M. Haeusler is a partner in Hughes Hubbard & Reed's Litigation practice, chair of the firm’s Class Action practice group, and head of the firm’s Los Angeles office. She has more than 30 years' experience litigating in a variety of state and federal courts throughout California, Nevada, Arizona, the Pacific Northwest, Tennessee, New Jersey and New York, and before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Her practice focuses primarily on complex litigation in the areas of intellectual property, entertainment, antitrust, class actions, e-commerce, privacy and employment law. Rita represents some of the largest consumer products companies in the world, counseling them on class action avoidance, reviewing advertisements, brochures and warranties and engaging, where desired, in pre-litigation confidential settlement negotiations. She also has worked on a number of cases involving drug companies, including the defense of the Cartwright Act and California Business & Professions Code Section 17200 claims brought by independent pharmacies alleging price-fixing and unfair competition with respect to prescription pharmaceuticals.

Among her professional activities, she is a member of Union Internationale des Avocats, a recent past chair and current member of the board of directors of the 9th Judicial Circuit Historical Society, and a member of the International bar Association.

She received both her B.A. cum laude and her J.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles.

Recognitions

Recommended in The Legal 500 United States for Product Liability, Mass Tort and Class Action Defense: Consumer Products (including Tobacco) (2022)

Professional Activities

Member, Union Internationale des Avocats, International Bar Association
Recent past chair and current member, board of directors, 9th Judicial Circuit Historical Society

Court Admissions

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
U.S. District Court of Arizona
U.S. District Court of Nevada
U.S. District Court of New Jersey
U.S. District Court of Oregon
U.S. District Court of Tennessee
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Class Action Litigation Matters

Mansour v. One of the World's Most Popular Dating Apps: Represent one of the world's most popular dating apps in defense of putative class action brought by male users of the dating app interested in women who claim that the dating app's “women message first” feature discriminates against men on the basis of sexual orientation and gender, and related California Bus. & Prof. Code Section 17200 unfair competition claim. In addition, the Mansour case involves the apps user data privacy rights and cross-border transfer of such data in the sensitive areas of dating and personal relationships
Lingasin v. One of the World's Most Popular Dating Apps and its founder: Represent one of the world's most popular dating apps, and its founder, in defense of putative class action brought by men interested in women who visited the dating app in the Apple and Google stores and who claim to have been deterred from signing up for the dating app due to its allegedly discriminatory “women message first” feature, and related California Bus. & Prof. Code Section 17200 unfair competition and negligence claims
Thompson v. Vitamin Shoppe: Represented Vitamin Shoppe in defense of wage-and-hour class-action and representative Personal Attorney General Act (PAGA) claims alleging unfair employment practices
DeLeon v. Campaigners Inc. et al.: Represented Campaigners Inc. in defense of a wage-and-hour class action alleging unfair employment practices
O'Hara v. Factory 2-U Stores Inc.: Represented Factory 2-U in defense of a wage-and-hour class action alleging unfair employment practices. Achieved lowest settlement number by several million dollars of any similar action
DiSimone v. DS Waters of America Inc.: Represent DS Waters in defense of a consumer fraud class action alleging deceptive advertising practices
Frausto v. Sparkletts Waters of North American LP et al.: Represent DS Waters in defense of a consumer class action alleging claims of unfair competition and false advertising and violations of the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act
Malone v. Danone Waters of North America Inc., etc. et al.: Represented DS Waters in defense of a consumer class action alleging false advertising and warranty claims based on offers for free Sparkletts products. Achieved de minimis settlement after defeating the plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief
Reff v. Danone Waters of North America Inc., etc. et al.: Represented DS Waters in defense of a consumer class action alleging unfair late charges. Achieved dismissal with no payment by defendants
Feld v. Circus Circus Hotel & Casino: Represented Circus Circus Hotel & Casino and Mandalay Bay Resorts in defense of a putative class action alleging false advertising of room rates. Achieved de minimis $1 per claimant coupon settlement
DePirro v. Advanced Marketing Services: Represented Advanced Marketing Services in defense of a consumer class action under Proposition 65 alleging tainted products, and under California Business & Professions Code Section 17200 alleging false advertising. Achieved dismissal following de minimis settlement
DePirro v. Shuyemora Cosmetics Inc. and Sephora: Represented Shuyemora Cosmetics and Sephora in defense of a class action under Proposition 65 alleging sale of tainted cosmetics, and under California Business & Professions Code Section 17200 alleging false advertising. Achieved dismissal following de minimis settlement
Smith v. VISA Inc., etc. et al.: Represent Innovative Merchant Solutions, a subsidiary of Intuit, in a class action alleging violations of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §1, the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §§15(a) et seq., and the Cartwright Act, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§16270 et seq
Soualian v. Barneys Inc.: Represent Barney's in defense of a putative class action alleging violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, 15 U.S.C. §1681c(g) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Defeated class certification
Najarian v. Avis Rent A Car Systems LLC: Represent Avis in defense of a putative class action alleging violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, 15 U.S.C. §1681c(g) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Defeated class certification. Case settled for de minimis payment
Thibeault v. Avis Rent A Car Systems LLC: Represent Avis in defense of a putative class action alleging violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, 15 U.S.C. §1681c(g) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Case settled for de minimis payment
Khorovsky v. Vitamin Shoppe: Represented Vitamin Shoppe in defense of a putative class action alleging violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, 15 U.S.C. §1681c(g) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Case settled for de minimis payment
Torossian v. Vitamin Shoppe: Represented Vitamin Shoppe in defense of a putative class action alleging violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, 15 U.S.C. §1681c(g) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Case settled for de minimis payment
Sutton v. Expedia: Represented Expedia in defense of a putative class action alleging violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, 15 U.S.C. §1681c(g) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act
Virag v. Allergan, etc. et al.: Represented Merck & Co. Inc. in defense of a consumer class action alleging unfair competition in the average wholesale pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals. Achieved dismissal with no payment by defendants
California Congress of Seniors v. Allergan, etc. et al.: Represent Merck & Co. Inc. in defense of a representative consumer action alleging unfair competition in the average wholesale pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals. Achieved dismissal with no payment by defendants
Clayworth v. Merck: Represented Merck & Co. Inc. in defense of Cartwright Act and California Business & Professions Code Section 17200 claims brought by independent pharmacies alleging price-fixing and unfair competition with respect to prescription pharmaceuticals. Case disposed of on summary judgment in favor of Merck; affirmed on appeal; currently pending before the California Supreme Court
In re Wireless Telephone 911 Calls Litigation: Represent LG Electronics Inc. and LG Electronics Mobilecomm USA Inc. in connection with the defense of ten putative class actions coordinated before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, alleging that the products of various cellular telephone manufacturers and service providers do not process emergency calls in the manner required by the Federal Communications Commission; actions voluntarily dismissed with prejudice with defendants’ summary judgments motions pending
Hirsch v. Jackoway: Represented the Jackoway Tyerman entertainment law firm in a dispute alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract with respect to employment agreements and percentage fee agreements; settled following a seven-week bench trial

General Litigation Matters

Frank v. LG Electronics Mobilecomm USA Inc.: Represent the US cellular phone distribution unit of LG Electronics Inc. (Korea) in defense of a claim alleging fraudulent and deceptive sales practices
Massaro v. LG Electronics Mobilecomm USA Inc.:Represent the US cellular phone distribution unit of LG Electronics Inc. (Korea) in defense of a products liability claim alleging injury purportedly caused by a defective cellular phone
Tate v. LG Electronics Mobilecomm USA Inc.: Represent the US cellular phone distribution unit of LG Electronics Inc. (Korea) in a defense of a claim alleging hearing loss purportedly caused by a cellular phone
Southerland v. LG Electronics Mobilecomm USA Inc.: Represent the US cellular phone distribution unit of LG Electronics Inc. (Korea) in defense of a products liability claim alleging injury purportedly caused by a defective cellular phone
Reilly v. Boy Scouts of America: Represent a local Boy Scouts troop in defense of a claim alleging that the troop is subject to—and in violation of—the Americans with Disabilities Act
Marciano v. Fahs (Christie's Inc.): Represent a former Christie's Auction House employee in claims brought by former client Georges Marciano (co-founder of "Guess" clothing and apparel company), alleging theft of art and property. Successfully had the case dismissed with prejudice and won monetary sanctions against Marciano
Film US (formerly known as Entertainment Industry Development Council (Film US)): Represent Film US, the film permitting agency, in representative actions relating to alleged unfair film permitting practices. Majority of the cases disposed of on summary judgment in favor of Film US with successful Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation claims by Film US

Employment Law Matters

Counsel insurance companies, national retail chains, investment firms, trading companies, banks and newspapers regarding employment and independent contractor issues

顔認識技術：民間使用に対する拡大する規制

Client Advisories

Facial Recognition Technology: The Expanding Regulation of Private Sector Use

Client Advisories

CCPA Litigation

Client Advisories

COVID-19: Privacy Law in the Time of Pandemic

Client Advisories

California Suspends Penalty Portions of California WARN Act in Response to COVID-19

Client Advisories

Five Things to Know About New York State's Paid Family Leave

Client Advisories