1. Why was this a unilateral and not a bilateral contract?

2. What are the elements of promissory estoppel, and how were they satisfied in this case?

Consumers brought an action against a tobacco company, asserting claims for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, and violations of the California Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) as a result of company's termination of customer-rewards program. The Ninth Circuit held that the company's customer-rewards program was not an offer to enter into a bilateral contract upon which consumers could base breach claims but that the consumers adequately alleged program was an offer to enter into unilateral contract. The consumers adequately alleged that company made a promise clear and unambiguous in its terms, as required to state promissory estoppel claim.