Brickman

Brickman v. Facebook, Inc.

Good Law
230 F. Supp. 3d 1036·2017 WL 386238·66 Communications Reg. (P&F) 233·2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11849
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 2017Case No. 16-cv-00751-TEHCalifornia6,454 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Henderson, J.

ORDER DENYING FACEBOOK’S MOTION TO DISMISS

On August 9, 2016, Facebook filed a motion to dismiss Brickman’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). ECF No. 50. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.1, Facebook also filed a Notice of Constitutional Question to the Attorney General of the United States. ECF No. 51. And pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.1(c), the United States intervened in the case for the limited purpose of defending the constitutionality of the TCPA. ECF No. 62. Brickman and the United States timely opposed Facebook’s motion to dismiss, ECF Nos. 55, 63; and Face-book timely replied. ECF No. 64. On September 11, 2016, the Court requested supplemental briefing from both Brickman and Facebook addressing whether the TCPA and its exceptions would pass strict scrutiny. See ECF No. 68. Both parties submitted supplemental briefing. ECF Nos. 71-72. A hearing was held on Face-book’s motion on January 23, 2017. After carefully considering the parties’ written and oral arguments, the Court DENIES Facebook’s motion for the reasons set forth below.

I. BACKGROUND

The following factual allegations are taken from Plaintiff Brickman’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”),…

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.