Dimitrouleas said the two individuals failed to prove they were harmed by paying more for a Quarter Pounder without cheese.
“A pleading must contain a ‘short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,’” the judge said in his ruling. “This pleading standard ‘does not require detailed factual allegations,’ but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed me accusation.”
Although the plaintiffs argued the fast food company’s app offers the Quarter Pounder without cheese for about 30 cents less than the one with cheese, the restaurant said, “The McDonald’s App does not constitute advertising because product availability and pricing on the App varies as a customer changes location and the App clearly states the same.”
The restaurant successfully refuted the argument, according to Dimitrouleas. He said the customers “failed to state any viable claims after two attempts. Moreover, it is clear that additional amendments would be futile.”
Read the full report on The Miami Herald.
» RELATED: Suspect in McDonald's standoff pulled pipes out of the wall, cops say