Frasco
Frasco v. Flo Health, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ERICA FRASCO, et al., Case No. 3:21-cv-00757-JD
Plaintiffs,
ORDER RE MOTIONS TO DISMISS
v.
FLO HEALTH, INC., et al., Defendants.
12 Defendant Flo Health’s motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint is granted for the Stored Communications Act claim and denied for all other claims. Dkt. No. 64 (complaint); Dkt. No. 93 (motion). The non-Flo defendants’ (Facebook, Inc., Google LLC, and Flurry, Inc.) motion is granted for the unjust enrichment claim and denied for all other claims. Dkt. No. 93. The claims against AppsFlyer, Inc., which joined the non-Flo defendants’ motion, are dismissed in toto. 1. Article III Standing. Named plaintiffs have Article III standing to sue because they plausibly alleged the disclosure of private information and intrusion upon seclusion. See, e.g., Dkt. No. 64 ¶¶ 5-16, 136, 262; Heeger v. Facebook, Inc., No. 18-cv-6399-JD, 2019 WL 7282477, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 27, 2019). The well-pleaded factual allegations include, among…