- Status
- Withdrawn (withdrawn)
- As of
- 11 Feb 2021 · read from the court record
- Court
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California · First instance
- Docket
- 3:20-cv-07871
- Judge
- William Alsup (reassigned from Joseph C. Spero)
- Filed
- 9 Nov 2020
- Type
- Class action, loot box and video game gambling lawsuits
- Money
- No settlement fund or award on record
- Payout
- No payout exists as of 14 Nov 2026
Status words follow the court record: a complaint states one side's allegations, only the court's orders decide anything. Filing a settlement claim is always free.
What this case is about
Three players alleged EA's patented Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment secretly rigs match difficulty to drive Ultimate Team pack purchases. After EA showed counsel engineering evidence that DDA is not used in Ultimate Team modes, the plaintiffs filed a Rule 41 notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice on 11 February 2021.
What this case is about
Zajonc et al. v. Electronic Arts Inc., docket 3:20-cv-07871, is a proposed class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, filed on 9 November 2020. Jason Zajonc, Danyael Williams and Pranko Lozano sued Electronic Arts Inc. for FIFA, Madden and NHL Ultimate Team players.
The complaint states the plaintiffs' allegations: that EA's patented Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment (DDA) secretly adjusts match difficulty to push players to buy Ultimate Team packs. The claims were under the California UCL, CLRA and false advertising law. The case is listed under Loot Box and Video Game Gambling Lawsuits.
Who is covered
The proposed class was players of the FIFA, Madden and NHL Ultimate Team modes. No class was certified, because the case ended before that stage.
Class counsel named in the record are the Law Office of Jack Fitzgerald PC and the Law Office of Paul K. Joseph PC. The judge was William Alsup, reassigned from Joseph C. Spero. The publisher's other cases are in Electronic Arts Lawsuits.
Is there a payout?
No payout exists in this case. It was dropped before any ruling or settlement, so there is no fund and no claim process, and nobody needs to file anything.
The record shows no money paid by EA to the plaintiffs or to players.
What the court decided
The court decided nothing on the merits. The plaintiffs filed a Rule 41 notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice on 11 February 2021 (Dkt. 22).
Press reporting says the dismissal followed EA showing counsel engineering evidence that DDA is not used in Ultimate Team modes. As of 14 November 2026 the case is withdrawn.
Dismissal without prejudice means the plaintiffs could refile. The record does not show a refiling, and the allegations were never tested in court.
Why it matters
The case is a reminder that a complaint is one side's allegations. Here the plaintiffs dropped the DDA theory after seeing the defendant's evidence, so no court found that EA rigged matches.
For what courts and regulators have actually ruled on loot boxes, read Are Loot Boxes Gambling.
Questions people ask
Did EA rig matches to sell packs?
No court found that. The plaintiffs alleged it, then dismissed the case on 11 February 2021 after EA showed counsel evidence that DDA is not used in Ultimate Team modes.
Was the lawsuit settled?
No. It was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice, with no settlement and no payment recorded in the case file.
Who brought the case?
Jason Zajonc, Danyael Williams and Pranko Lozano, for FIFA, Madden and NHL Ultimate Team players, filed it on 9 November 2020.
Related cases
- Ramirez v. Electronic Arts: a related Ultimate Team suit against EA, status withdrawn.
Who is involved
Plaintiffs: Jason Zajonc, Danyael Williams and Pranko Lozano for FIFA, Madden and NHL Ultimate Team players
| Defendants | Electronic Arts Inc. |
|---|---|
| Class counsel | Law Office of Jack Fitzgerald PC; Law Office of Paul K. Joseph PC |
| Judge | William Alsup (reassigned from Joseph C. Spero) |
| Claims |
|
If you need a lawyer, start with the court-appointed class counsel named above or the bar association referral service of your state or country. This site does not refer readers to law firms.
Is there a payout?
No payout exists in this case as of 14 Nov 2026.
What happens next
No future date is on the record we hold. The case is closed on the record we hold; later appeals or enforcement steps would be added here.
Timeline
2 dated steps on record, oldest first. Future dates come from court notices and can move.
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 9 Nov 2020 | Filed |
| 11 Feb 2021 | Withdrawn |
Documents and sources
2 primary sources (court file, administrator notice, regulator) and 1 secondary. Press is supporting evidence only.
- Docket: storage.courtlistener.com
- Court document: storage.courtlistener.com
- Press coverage: videogameschronicle.com
| What it supports | Source | Type | Retrieved |
|---|---|---|---|
| complaint filed 9 November 2020, case 3:20-cv-07871-JCS, plaintiffs, DDA theory | truthinadvertising.org | primary | 14 Nov 2026 |
| notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice filed 11 February 2021 (Dkt. 22), counsel | storage.courtlistener.com | primary | 14 Nov 2026 |
| dismissal followed EA's demonstration that DDA is not used in Ultimate Team | videogameschronicle.com | secondary | 14 Nov 2026 |
Related cases
1 case in the record share parties, claims or a settlement with this one.
| Case | Court | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Ramirez v. EA (FIFA and Madden Ultimate Team packs) | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San Jose) | Withdrawn |
Last checked against the sources on 14 Nov 2026. Found an error? Tell us and we correct the record with a dated note.