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