In Re LinkedIn Advertising Metrics Litigation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 TOPDEVZ, LLC, et al., Case No. 20-cv-08324-SVK

Plaintiffs,

ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS

v. SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

LINKEDIN CORPORATION, Re: Dkt. No. 98 Defendant.

Plaintiffs, on behalf of a putative class of advertisers, allege that Defendant LinkedIn Corporation overstates the level of actual user engagement with ads placed on the LinkedIn platform in order to overcharge advertisers. See Dkt. 89 (Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”)). All Parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge. Dkt. 10, 13; see also Dkt. 52. Now before the Court is LinkedIn’s motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(b) and 12(b)(6). Dkt. 97-98. The Court deems this motion suitable for determination without oral argument. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART LinkedIn’s motion to dismiss. Although the Court rejects…