US Judge Rules Past iCloud Subscribers Can't Pursue Injunctive Relief in Class Action
In partially granting Apple's motion to dismiss a class action of iCloud users who argue that the tech company fraudulently outsourced the storage of their data to Microsoft and Google, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh ruled that class members who did not pay Apple for storage do not currently have standing for injunctive relief.
March 30, 2020 at 08:46 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
A federal judge has partially granted Apple Inc.'s motion to dismiss a putative class action over claims that it breached its contract with iCloud Users when it enlisted other tech giants to store user data, further outlining what qualifies as an injury worthy of standing in cases involving consumer data.
The class members allege that Apple deceived them into overpaying for the iCloud subscription since their content was stored by the likes of Amazon, Microsoft and Google, some of which offer cheaper storage and cloud computing services, and not by Apple, as the agreement suggested, according to the August complaint.
U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh of the Northern District of California agreed with the company's Cooley attorneys that class members must currently pay for an iCloud subscription to qualify for injunctive relief. The jurist, who Wired once dubbed the "Meme-Worthy Judge of Silicon Valley's Titans" as her rulings in the Yahoo and Adobe data breach cases blazed fresh trails in data protection law, invoked two of her prior decisions in the March 27 order.
Koh ruled that the "real and immediate threat of repeated injury" necessary to gain standing for Article III injunctive relief does not apply to class members who do not currently pay for the service, and she said plaintiffs do not allege that they currently pay for iCloud or plan to in the future.
"Simply pleading that Plaintiffs are storing their data on Apple's iCloud is not enough to plead an injury in fact because Plaintiffs' injury is not merely connected to storing data on the iCloud but to overpaying for the paid version of iCloud storage," Koh wrote. "Without alleging that Plaintiffs are currently paid iCloud subscribers—as opposed to merely utilizing the free five GB of iCloud storage—Plaintiffs have not met their burden of establishing an injury that is 'certainly impending.'"
The judge granted Apple's motion to dismiss injunctive relief claims and alleged violations of California's False Advertising (FAL) and Unfair Competition Laws (UCL) but offered plaintiffs leave to amend.
Koh cited In re iPhone Application Litigation, which she presided over, in batting away class members' claims that they relied on the contractual language in their decision to purchase a subscription, a necessary prong in FAL and UCL violations.
"Plaintiffs assert that they adequately plead reliance because they 'affirmatively clicked the "AGREE" [button] signifying their review and assent to the contract terms,' including Apple's alleged misrepresentations regarding iCloud storage. This Court, however, has previously rejected this precise argument," she wrote.
However, the judge did find that the class sufficiently made a case for monetary damages under Article III with their claims that "Apple's 'price premium' harmed putative class members who would have otherwise utilized these cheaper cloud storage alternatives."
Plaintiffs, who are represented by The Katriel Law Firm and The Mehdi Firm, allege that Apple breached its terms of service by handing off its digital files to third-parties to store in their facilities. Koh said that in the Yahoo data breach litigation, "this court has previously recognized that such allegations are sufficient to confer standing."
Apple and Cooley's Beatriz Mejia, Matthew Brown and Lauren Pomeroy in San Francisco did not respond to a request for comment at the time of publication. Roy Katriel of The Katriel Law Firm Del Mar, California, and Azra Mehdi of The Mehdi Firm in San Francisco also did not respond to a request for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigators of the Week: After a 74-Day Trial, Shook Fends Off Claims From Artist’s Heirs Against UMB Bank
An ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
‘It's Your Funeral’: Avoiding Doing Damage to Your Client’s Case With Uncivil Behavior
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250