Perkins

Perkins v. Linkedin Corp.

Good Law
53 F. Supp. 3d 1190·2014 WL 2751053·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81042
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 12, 2014Case No.: 13-CV-04303-LHKCalifornia13,194 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Koh, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Paul Perkins, Pennie Sempell, Ann Brandwein, Erin Eggers, Clare Connaugh-ton, Jake Kushner, Natalie Richstone, Nicole Crosby, and Leslie Wall, on behalf of themselves and a putative class (“Plaintiffs”), bring the instant action against Linkedln Corporation (“Defendant” or “Linkedln”). See ECF No. 7. The gravamen of Plaintiffs’ complaint is that Defendant, the operator of a popular social networking website, violated several state and federal laws by harvesting email addresses from the contact lists of email accounts associated with Plaintiffs’ Linkedln accounts and by sending repeated invitations to join Linkedln to the harvested email addresses. See id. ¶ 2. Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss the operative complaint, the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). See ECF No. 17. The Motion is fully briefed, see ECF Nos. 24, 30, and the Court held a hearing on the Motion, see ECF No. 44 (“Tr.”). Having considered the briefing, applicable law, and the oral arguments presented at the hearing, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendant’s Motion. The Court also grants Plaintiffs leave to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.