|
Experience
Rushing v. Twitter, Et. Al
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Represented Twitter, including its MoPub division, in Rushing v. Twitter, et al. in defense of claims for intrusion upon seclusion and unfair competition stemming from alleged profiling of children for targeted advertising purposes. Successfully settled as an injunctive relief-only class settlement.
David Borden v. eFinancial
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Defended eFinancial in a case in which the plaintiff alleged that he provided eFinancial with his phone number for a request for insurance quotes, and eFinancial used an unlawful autodialer in sending texts to the plaintiff. Prevailed on motion to dismiss, obtaining an order of dismissal with prejudice on the grounds that the plaintiff had not alleged the use of an autodialer. Defended the matter on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which resulted in an affirmance and favorable case law on an issue of first impression in Borden v. eFinancial, No. 2:19-cv-01430 (Nov. 16, 2022) (holding that an “‘automatic telephone dialing system’ must generate and dial random or sequential telephone numbers under the TCPA’s plain text”).
Class Action v. Automobile Manufacturer
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Successfully defended an auto manufacturer in a case that alleged violations of the Washington Privacy Act for alleged unlawful interception and recording of texts when a cell phone is connected to a client’s entertainment systems. The court granted the motion with leave to amend, but the plaintiff accepted the judgment and has appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
NMAG v. Tiny Labs
New Mexico Attorney General Action
Represented Twitter and MoPub in defense of claims for intrusion upon seclusion and COPPA violations stemming from alleged profiling of children for targeted advertising purposes. Obtained an order dismissing the case with prejudice after filing a motion to dismiss, contesting the attorney general’s allegations of actual knowledge.
Allen v. Quicken loans, et al.
Successfully defended Quicken Loans in a case that alleged NaviStone and Quicken Loans violated privacy laws relating to the Federal Wiretap Act with respect to the use of tracking technology on the Quicken Loans website. We won the case on a motion to dismiss, with prejudice, on the basis that the plaintiff had not alleged any violation.
Alhadeff v. LegalZoom.com, Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Successfully represented LegalZoom.com Inc. in defense of a class action complaint seeking to recover statutory damages on behalf of all Florida residents who visited LegalZoom.com’s website. The complaint alleged that session replay software on LegalZoom.com’s website violated Florida’s wiretap statute, the Florida Security of Communications Act. Filed motion to compel arbitration, which resolved the case.
Facebook Inc. et al. v. Superior Court of San Francisco City and County et al.
Court of Appeal of the State of California, First Appellate District
Successfully defended Facebook, Instagram and Twitter in a case that ruled that criminal defendants do not have a pretrial right to public and private content posted by the victim on social media in violation of the Stored Communications Act's (SCA) protection of private communications. The decision overturned the trial court ruling that sided with the defendants, who argued that restricting their access to the information violated their constitutional right to due process, presentation of a complete defense and effective assistance of counsel.
Maghen v. Quicken Loans, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Represented Quicken Loans in an appeal of a victory on summary judgment in a call recording case brought in California under the California Invasion of Privacy Act. The trial court found the plaintiff had consented to the recording of his telephone calls, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed.
Opperman v. Path, Inc., et al.
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Defended Twitter Inc. against putative class action asserting invasion of privacy and related claims against Apple and iOS application developers that allegedly copied iPhone users’ mobile address books without consent. Motion to dismiss granted on virtually all claims, and case favorably settled after court limited damages to nominal damages.
Chey v. Facebook. Inc.
Represented Facebook, Inc. in defense of a claim that automated systems designed to protect users resulted in users not seeing the plaintiff’s films. The case was favorably settled after the plaintiff’s deposition.
Facebook, Inc. v. Touchstone
California Court of Appeal
Criminal defendant sought Facebook records from the victim of a shooting. Represented Facebook in its successful petition for writ of mandate from the appellate court directing the trial court to vacate its order denying Facebook’s motion to quash a subpoena and enter a new order granting the motion to quash a subpoena for the records sought.
Goldboss v. Philz Coffee
Defended Philz Coffee in a putative class action in which plaintiff alleged that a surcharge violated California consumer protection and false advertising laws. Obtained summary judgment for Philz, resulting in full dismissal of the matter.
Thomas v. A Place for Mom, Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Successfully defended class action alleging unlawful telephone call recording by A Place for Mom, that sought statutory damages for alleged violation of Florida’s wiretap statute. Filed motion to dismiss raising issues that would dispose of the entire case, and plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the action before the Court ruled on that motion.
Rorty v. Quicken Loans
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
Successfully moved to dismiss three of four causes of action and obtained discovery sanctions on remaining TCPA cause of action, resulting in dismissal of the case.
