Esparza

INTRODUCTION

17 In this putative class action, plaintiff asserts that defendant website owner violated a 18 California wiretapping statute when website visitors utilize a chat feature on defendant’s 19 website. Defendant moves to dismiss or alternatively to compel arbitration. On the eve of the 20 scheduled motion hearing, the parties stipulated to plaintiff filing an amended complaint, and 21 by implication (because it is mentioned nowhere in the stipulation) to defendant withdrawing 22 the pending motion to dismiss. For the reasons that follow, the stipulation is improper and the 23 motion to dismiss is GRANTED.

STATEMENT

25 The facts are bare. Plaintiff Miguel Esparza is a California resident who visited 26 defendant Lenox Corporation’s website. During that visit, plaintiff conducted a conversation 27 embedded code on the chat feature “automatically intercepts, records and creates transcripts of all such conversations.” It further alleges that defendant “allows at least one independent third-party vendor (on information and belief, 8X8) to secretly intercept (during transmission and in real time), eavesdrop upon, and store transcripts of chat…