Hughes

Hughes v. Apple, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 15, 20243:22-cv-07668California9,824 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAUREN HUGHES, et al., Case No. 22-cv-07668-VC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER PARTIALLY DENYING AND

v. PARTIALLY GRANTING THE

MOTION TO DISMISS

APPLE, INC.,

Re: Dkt. No. 50 Defendant.

The AirTag is a small, affordable location-tracking device manufactured and sold by Apple. It is marketed as a convenient way to keep track of personal items, like car keys. The AirTag reports its location to its owner’s cell phone, so you can simply attach the AirTag to your car keys and then you can use your cell phone to find them. But people do not always use a product as marketed. The thirty-eight plaintiffs in this case allege they were stalked by someone who used an AirTag to follow their location and movements. From the beginning, it was obvious that the AirTag would be an especially useful tool for stalkers. So Apple has designed it with features that aim to diminish the ability of stalkers to use it effectively. But the plaintiffs allege that those features are inadequate, and that Apple could and should have done more. They have filed a 131-page class action complaint against Apple, asserting many…

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.