The complaint also asserts six California state law claims against Google only. Count IV claims violation of the privacy right conferred by the California Constitution. Count V claims intrusion upon seclusion under California tort law. Count VI claims violation of the Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200. Count VII claims violation of the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, Cal. Penal Code § 502. Count VIII claims violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act, Cal. Penal Code § 630 et seq. And Count IX claims violation of the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1750 et seq. The defendants moved to dismiss the entire complaint for lack of Article III standing and for failure to state any claim. Without definitively resolving the standing challenge, the District Court agreed with the defendants that the allegations in the complaint did not give rise to any action, and on that basis dismissed the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6).14 On appeal, the plaintiffs challenge the dismissal of each of their nine claims, and the defendants renew their contention that the plaintiffs lack Article III standing. II. Injury in Fact Before we reach the merits, we address the defendants’ argument that the plaintiffs lack standing. “[T]he question of standing is whether the litigant is entitled to have the court 14 In re Google Inc. Cookie Placement Consumer Privacy Litig., 988 F. Supp. 2d 434 (D. Del. 2013). 13