In Hypertouch , Inc. v. ValueClick, Inc. (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 805, some subject lines stated "the recipient of the e-mail can get a free gift" and others suggested "the recipient can obtain something free for doing a particular task." (Id. at p. 840.) Other e-mails contained "a variety of phrases that might indicate to the recipient" there were "terms and conditions that must be fulfilled to obtain the gift." (Ibid.) The Hypertouch court held section 17529.5, subdivision (a)(3) is violated where an e-mail's subject line creates an impression contradicted by the body of the e-mail. (Hypertouch, supra, at p. 838.) In Hypertouch, Inc. v. ValueClick, Inc., a marketing company sent e-mails containing numerous subject lines and a wide variety of different statements within the email. Id. at 31-32. Some subject lines stated "that the recipient of the e-mail could get a free gift ("Get a $300 gift card FREE"; "Get a FREE Golf Retreat to 1 of 10 destinations"), others suggested that the recipient could obtain something free for doing a particular task ("Let us know your opinion and win a free gift card"; "Do you think Hillary will win? Participate now for a Visa gift card"), while still others contained a variety of phrases that might indicate to the recipient that there are terms and conditions that must be fulfilled to obtain the gift ("Let us buy you a designer department store gift card. Participate now"; "Participate to receive a Holiday iPhone! (See offer for details)".) Id. at 35. The court held that the respondents were not entitled to summary judgment, because they "made no effort to explain why a reasonable trier of fact could not conclude that many of the subject lines at issue, such as those offering a free gift card with no qualifying language, would be likely to mislead a reasonable person." Id. The court further reasoned that respondents referred only to isolated e-mails in the record, "such as one e-mail with the subject line 'GAP Promotion,' and argued that those particular e-mails are, as a matter of law, not deceptive. Regardless of whether Respondent is correct that the isolated e-mails it cited are not likely to mislead the recipient, that alone did not entitle it to summary judgment on Hypertouch's claim, which includes many other subject lines that Respondents do not address." Id.