In Re Meta Pixel Healthcare Litigation

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 20243:22-cv-03580California4,453 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 Case No. 22-cv-03580-WHO

ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS

IN RE META HEALTHCARE PIXEL AND STRIKE LITIGATION Re: Dkt. Nos. 387, 388

In my September 7, 2023 Order, I denied defendant Meta Platform, Inc.’s motion to dismiss certain claims, but granted it with leave to amend plaintiffs’ claims for invasion of privacy/intrusion on seclusion, California’s Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act (“CDAFA”), negligence per se, trespass, larceny, Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), and California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”). Doe v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No. 22-CV- 03580-WHO, 2023 WL 5837443, at *17 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 7, 2023). In their First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint (“FAC,” Dkt. No. 334-3) plaintiffs did not reallege their negligence per se, larceny, or UCL claims and amended and realleged their privacy/intrusion of seclusion, CDAFA, trespass and CLRA claims. Meta moves again to dismiss. Plaintiffs voluntarily…

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.