Federal Case

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that common law notions of scope of consent govern 13 the authorization inquiry under the Stored Communications Act
• holding that e-mail messages 11 held on an ISP’s server were in electronic storage
• holding that emails stored on 1 the servers of the internet service provider which provided email services to the 2 plaintiff company were in “electronic storage” both before and after delivery
• holding that an email service 12 provider constituted an ECS provider
• holding that an email service provider constituted an ECS provider
• finding that a subpoena subjected a non-party to undue burden because it “ordered production of [documents] . . . with no limitation as to time or scope”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).