United States District Court, D. Oregon
OPINION & ORDER
Michael McShane, United States District Judge.
Robert Roblin purchased a Recreational Vehicle
(“RV”) manufactured by Defendant Newmar Corp.
(“Newmar”). Newmar built the RV on a chassis
manufactured by Freightliner Custom Chassis Corp.
(“FCCC”). Plaintiff moves for partial summary
judgment on their claim under Oregon's Lemon Law, Or.
Rev. Stat. § 646A.400 et. seq., alleging that
all repairs on the RV are attributable to Newmar as the
manufacturer. Newmar counters that they are not responsible
to repairs done to the chassis. Based on a plain reading of
the statute and the fact that lemon laws are remedial
statutes meant to protect consumers, Plaintiff's Motion
for Partial Summary Judgment, ECF No. 60, is GRANTED.
court must grant summary judgment if there is no genuine
issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to
judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). An issue is
“genuine” if a reasonable jury could return a
verdict in favor of the non-moving party. Rivera v.
Phillip Morris, Inc., 395 F.3d 1142, 1146 (9th Cir.
2005) (citing Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477
U.S. 242, 248 (1986)). A fact is “material” if it
could affect the outcome of the case. Id. The court
reviews evidence and draws inferences in the light most
favorable to the non-moving party. Miller v. Glenn Miller
Prods., Inc., 454 F.3d 975, 988 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting
Hunt v. Cromartie, 526 U.S. 541, 552 (1999)). When
the moving party has met its burden, the non-moving party
must present “specific facts showing that there is a
genuine issue for trial.” Matsushita Elec. Indus.
Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586-87 (1986)
(quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e)).
Plaintiff purchased the RV at issue, he immediately began
experiencing mechanical difficulties. It is undisputed that the RV
was out of service for more than 60 days and that three or
more unsuccessful attempts were made to repair the RV's
cooling systems, which is part of the chassis.
Compare Pl.'s Mot. for Part. Summ. J. 2-10, ECF
No. 60 with Def.'s Resp. 4-12, ECF No. 76.
Plaintiff moves for partial summary judgment with respect to
their Oregon Lemon Law claim on the basis that they have met
the statute's threshold requirements and that there are
no genuine issues left for trial.
initial matter, Plaintiff has met the preliminary
requirements under Oregon's Lemon Law. The alleged
nonconformities and repairs alleged by Plaintiff occurred
within two years following date of original delivery and the
date on which the RV's mileage reached 24, 000,
satisfying Or. Rev. Stat. § 646A.402(2). Roblin Decl.
¶ 30, ECF No. 61. Plaintiff also satisfied the
notification requirements under Or. Rev. Stat. §
646A.402(2)-(3) by continuously updating Newmar of the
RV's mechanical problems via phone and email.
Id. at ¶ 32; Pl.'s Mot. for Part. Summ. J.
12 tbl. 1. Plaintiff also sought alternative dispute
resolution with Newmar, satisfying the final preliminary
requirement under Oregon's Lemon Law. Roblin Decl.
¶¶ 33-34, Ex. 13-15.
are two affirmative defenses available under the statute, but
neither applies here. See Or. Rev. Stat. §
646A.404(4)(a) (invalidating a lemon law claim if the alleged
nonconformity does not substantially impair use, market
value, or safety); Or. Rev. Stat. § 646A.404(4)(b)
(invalidating a lemon law claim if the nonconformity is the
result of abuse, neglect, or unauthorized modifications or
alterations to the motor vehicle).
plaintiff has met the preliminary requirements, Oregon's
Lemon Law requires the manufacturer to conform a vehicle to
any applicable warranties:
If the manufacturer or agents or authorized dealers
of the manufacturer are unable to conform the motor
vehicle to an applicable manufacturer's express
warranty by repairing or correcting a defect or
condition that substantially impairs the use, market value or
safety of the motor vehicle to the consumer after a
reasonable number of attempts, the manufacturer
(a) Replace the motor vehicle with a new motor vehicle; or
(b) Accept return of the vehicle from the consumer and refund
to the consumer the full purchase . . . price.
Or. Rev. Stat. § 646A.404(1) (emphasis added).
an Oregon RV consumer is entitled to Oregon Lemon Law
protection if they meet ...