Appellant Gaetano Paduano appeals from a judgment of the trial court in favor of defendant American Honda Motor Company, Inc. (Honda). Gaetano Paduano purchased a new 2004 Honda Civic Hybrid in June 2004, and subsequently became displeased with the fuel efficiency of the vehicle. The federally mandated label that was on Paduano's vehicle at the time he purchased it showed that the Civic Hybrid with continuously variable transmission had received an EPA rating of 47 miles per gallon (mpg) for city driving and 48 mpg for highway driving. Paduano was achieving approximately half of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) fuel economy estimate that was disclosed on the federally mandated new car label.

Paduano stated that he had read and relied on statements Honda made in an advertising brochure describing the attributes of the 2004 Civic Hybrid in deciding to purchase the vehicle. The brochure highlighted an EPA estimate of 51 mpg, and stated "With impressive fuel economy of up to 51 mpg, you save money, the planet conserves resources and the air is just a little cleaner," and "Just drive the Hybrid like you would a conventional car and save on fuel bills." On another page of the brochure, Honda explains that the 51 mpg rating refers to the manual transmission hybrid model, and identifies an EPA estimate of 48 mpg for the variable transmission model.

After Paduano was informed by a service employee at a Honda dealership that driving conditions affect the fuel efficiency of hybrid vehicles more than that of conventional vehicles, and that his Civic Hybrid could achieve higher fuel efficiency only if he significantly altered his driving habits, Paduano requested that Honda repurchase the vehicle from him. When Honda refused, Paduano filed this action for deceptive advertising.

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (ECPA), which requires disclosure of the EPA's fuel economy estimate, provides: "When a requirement under [the ECPA] is in effect, a State or a political subdivision of a State may adopt or enforce a law or regulation on disclosure of fuel economy or fuel operating costs for an automobile covered by [the ECPA] only if the law or regulation is identical to that requirement."

Questions are true or false, this is a practice case.

1. Paduano's false advertising claim is not preempted by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, which requires states that elect to adopt or enforce fuel economy regulations to do so only if they are identical to federal standards.

2. If Paduano's purchased the Honda with the proceeds of an auto loan, the creditor must disclose the terms of the loan, including the finance charges and annual percentage rate, under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act.

3. The revelation of the EPA estimated gas mileage is not an express warranty, because it merely disclosed the data Honda gave to the EPA and does not describe the performance of the car. Hence Paduano does not have a valid cause of action for breach of express warranty, if his car did not achieve the estimated gas mileage.

4. California's prohibition against false advertising in the CLRA is not preempted by the Federal Trade Act of 1914, which created the FTC and charged it with preventing deceptive advertising.

5. Under the U.C.C., if Honda's descriptions of its automobiles in its brochures and promotional materials qualify as express warranties, Honda cannot disclaim implied warranties and must disclose whether the full or limited implied warranty is given.