We represented Sprint and Wirelessco in a case brought by representatives of a class of Sprint subscribers allegedly harmed by Sprint's practice of locking handsets sold through Sprint. Plaintiffs alleged four causes of action, all of which allege that Sprint "defraud[s] consumers by concealing from them the qualities of the handsets they purchase from Sprint and by secretly imposing unfair and improper obstacles to switching to a carrier other than Sprint." In the month preceding trial, Sprint moved to exclude plaintiffs' expert witnesses on the ground of improper invocation of the attorney-client privilege. In addition, we moved to exclude plaintiffs' survey, damages and technical experts as irrelevant, incompetent and inaccurate, respectively. The Court tentatively granted all of Sprint's dispositive motions in limine, decimating the plaintiffs' case and forcing plaintiffs to settle for nuisance value.