Lineberry

facts, the applicable legal standards, and the arguments made by the parties. 1. Personal jurisdiction. The complaint adequately alleges specific personal jurisdiction over AddShoppers in California. According to the complaint, the company orchestrates a scheme with thousands of retailers to (1) intercept and collect information that consumers share with those retailers; and (2) use that collection of information to send unwanted emails to the devices of those consumers. Many of the retailers are alleged to be California companies (including the two retailers named as defendants). This case is distinguishable from the recently issued Briskin v. Shopify, Inc., 87 F.4th 404 (9th Cir. 2023). There, Shopify’s contractual arrangements with California retailers were for the processing of consumer payments—they were distinct from (and therefore unrelated to, for purposes of specific jurisdiction) the scheme that Shopify allegedly implemented to passively collect information from consumers in California and nationwide. Id. at 413–15. In this case, the alleged contracts between AddShoppers and California retailers are for the express purpose of enabling AddShoppers to collect customer data…