In Re Google Inc. Cookie Placement Consumer Privacy Litigation

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that storage in a web browser on a personal computer is not “[temporary storage incidental to, transmission” within the meaning of the SCA
• stating that it is the “specific congressional intent to deal with the particular problem of private communications in network service providers’ possession”
• concluding the plaintiff’s CIPA claim failed for the same reasons its Federal Wiretap Act claim failed
• defining the parties to a communication as “the speaker and/or sender, and at least one intended recipient”
• dismissing claims under the CFAA, UCL, and CCDAFA for lack of Article III standing
• rejecting the plaintiffs’ argument that they suffered loss under the CDAFA through the defendants’ “capturing and making economic use of [the plaintiffs’ personally identifiable information]” thus “depriving the plaintiffs of their own ability to sell their internet usage information”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).