Campbell et al v. Facebook Inc.

Filing 53

ANSWER to Amended Complaint; Jury Demand byFacebook Inc.. (Jessen, Joshua) (Filed on 2/6/2015) Modified on 2/9/2015 (cpS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
JOSHUA A. JESSEN, SBN 222831
[e-mail]
JEANA BISNAR MAUTE, SBN 290573
[e-mail]
ASHLEY M. ROGERS, SBN 286252
[e-mail]
1881 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
GAIL E. LEES, SBN 90363
[e-mail]
CHRISTOPHER CHORBA, SBN 216692
[e-mail]
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
FACEBOOK, INC.

13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

OAKLAND DIVISION

17

MATTHEW CAMPBELL, MICHAEL
HURLEY, and DAVID SHADPOUR,

18

Case No. C 13-05996 PJH
PUTATIVE CLASS ACTION

Plaintiffs,
19
v.
20
FACEBOOK, INC.,

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S
ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’
CONSOLIDATED AMENDED
COMPLAINT

21
Defendant.

[JURY TRIAL DEMANDED]

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1
2
3

Defendant Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”) answers Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Amended
Complaint (the “Complaint”) as follows:
Except as otherwise expressly recognized herein, Facebook denies each and every allegation

4

contained in the Complaint. Facebook states that the headings, sub-headings and footnotes

5

throughout the Complaint do not constitute well-pled allegations of fact and therefore require no

6

response. To the extent a response is required, Facebook denies the allegations in the headings, sub-

7

headings, and footnotes in the Complaint. Facebook expressly reserves the right to seek to amend

8

and/or supplement its Answer as may be necessary.
“I.

9
10

1.

INTRODUCTION”

Facebook denies the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 1. Facebook

11

disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct, or that its conduct provides a basis for any

12

actionable claim. The remaining allegations in paragraph 1 are conclusions of law for which no

13

responsive pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the remaining

14

allegations in paragraph 1 are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook admits that

15

Plaintiffs purport to bring claims under these statutes and are requesting an order seeking injunctive,

16

declaratory, and monetary relief, except that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court

17

dismissed Plaintiffs’ UCL and CIPA § 632 claims with prejudice. Facebook denies that Plaintiffs

18

are entitled to any relief and/or remedies under any of these laws, or that this action may be

19

maintained as a class action.

20

2.

Facebook lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations

21

in paragraph 2 that pertain to Plaintiffs’ use of Facebook and/or the Facebook Messages product.

22

Facebook denies Plaintiffs’ characterizations of the Facebook Messages product and its disclosures

23

related to the Facebook Messages product. Facebook admits that it processes the messages of

24

Facebook users who send or receive messages through the Messages product. Facebook further

25

admits that, at certain times, and under certain circumstances, if a message sent through the

26

Facebook Messages product included a link to another website (uniform resource identifier

27

(“URL”)) that contained a Facebook “Like” button plugin, the aggregate “Like” count for that URL

28
1
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

displayed on a social plugin may have increased. Facebook denies the remaining allegations in

2

paragraph 2.

3

3.

Facebook admits that, while it offers the Facebook social networking service to users

4

for free, it generates revenue from targeted advertising. Facebook further admits that it has

5

approximately 1.2 billion users. Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct, or that

6

its conduct provides a basis for any actionable claim. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the

7

allegations in paragraph 3.

8

4.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 4.
“II.

9
10

5.

THE PARTIES”

Facebook admits that a Facebook account with a user name of Matthew Campbell

11

exists. Facebook lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining

12

allegations in paragraph 5.

13

6.

Facebook admits that a Facebook account with a user name of Michael Hurley exists.

14

Facebook lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations in

15

paragraph 6.

16

7.

Facebook admits that a Facebook account with a user name of David Shadpour

17

exists. Facebook lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining

18

allegations in paragraph 7.

19

8.

“III.

20
21

Facebook admits the allegations in paragraph 8.

9.

JURISDICTION”

Facebook admits that this Court has federal question jurisdiction over claims that

22

arise under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, but Facebook denies that Plaintiffs have

23

standing under Article III of the United States Constitution. Facebook further denies Plaintiffs have

24

stated a claim for a violation of any law, or that this action may be maintained as a class action.

25

Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 9.

26

10.

Facebook admits that this Court has diversity jurisdiction under the Class Action

27

Fairness Act, but Facebook denies that Plaintiffs have standing under Article III of the United States

28

Constitution. Facebook further denies Plaintiffs have stated a claim for a violation of any law, or

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

2
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

that this action may be maintained as a class action. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the

2

allegations in paragraph 10.

3

11.

Facebook admits that its headquarters are in California and that it conducts business

4

in California. The remaining allegations in paragraph 11 are conclusions of law for which no

5

responsive pleading is required and which are therefore denied.
“IV.

6
7

12.

INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT”

Facebook admits that its executive offices and corporate headquarters are located in

8

Menlo Park, California. Insofar as the allegations in paragraph 12 state conclusions of law, no

9

response is required. To the extent a response is required, Facebook is without information

10

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in this paragraph and denies each and

11

every allegation on that basis. Facebook denies any express or implied allegation within this

12

paragraph that any of its conduct was improper or unlawful.

13

13.

Facebook admits the allegations in paragraph 13.
“V.

14
15

14.

CHOICE OF LAW”

The allegations in paragraph 14 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

16

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 14

17

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook admits that paragraph 14 contains what

18

appears to be a partial excerpt of its Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, and avers this

19

document speaks for itself. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 14.
“VI.

20
21

15.

FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS”

Facebook admits that it operates the world’s largest social-networking website.

22

Facebook admits that it has approximately 1.2 billion users. Facebook further admits that its social-

23

networking website enables users to share text, photography, video, and other Internet content.

24

Facebook lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations in

25

paragraph 15.

26

16.

Facebook admits that its social-networking website enables users to communicate

27

with one another. Facebook admits that the Facebook social-networking website includes Facebook

28

Pages and the Facebook Messages product. By way of further response, Facebook avers that

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

3
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

Facebook Pages and the Facebook Messages product are not the only tools offered on the Facebook

2

social-networking website. Facebook admits that the Facebook Messages product includes

3

messages and chats. Facebook further admits that Facebook chats are in an instant messaging

4

format. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 16.

5

17.

Facebook admits that, in order to establish a Facebook account, a Facebook user must

6

agree to Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities and acknowledge reading Facebook’s

7

Data Use Policy. Facebook further admits that paragraph 17 contains what appears to be a partial

8

excerpt of a prior version of the Facebook website at wwww.facebook.com, and Facebook avers that

9

the document speaks for itself.

10

18.

Facebook admits the allegations in paragraph 18.

11

19.

Facebook admits that paragraph 19 quotes certain language used in one or more

12

versions of its Statement of Rights and Responsibilities and Data Use Policy, and avers that these

13

documents speak for themselves. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in

14

paragraph 19.

15

20.

Facebook admits that paragraph 20 quotes certain language used in an article that was

16

available on the Facebook Help Center. Facebook admits that there are different ways to share

17

content on Facebook, including sharing content with a broad audience, sharing content with a small

18

group of friends, and sharing content with an individual. Facebook admits that one way to share

19

content with an individual is to send a message. By way of further response, Facebook avers that

20

the document speaks for itself.

21

21.

Facebook admits that paragraph 21 quotes portions of an article that was available on

22

the Facebook Help Center. By way of further response, Facebook avers that the document speaks

23

for itself. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 21.

24

22.

Facebook admits that the Facebook Messages product has, at certain points in time,

25

included email, chat, and messaging functionality. Facebook admits that, at certain points in time,

26

users were able to use the Facebook Messages product to send messages to and receive messages

27

from Facebook users and non-Facebook email addresses. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies

28

the allegations in paragraph 22.

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

4
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

23.

Facebook admits that the Facebook Messages product enables users to communicate

2

with one another. Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterizations of its Facebook Messages product

3

and its disclosures related to the Facebook Messages product, or that its conduct provides a basis for

4

any actionable claim. Facebook further admits that paragraph 23 quotes certain language used in

5

articles that were available on the Facebook Help Center, and avers that these documents speak for

6

themselves. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 23.

7

24.

Facebook admits that paragraph 24 contains certain words that were included in a

8

Facebook post that was previously available on the Internet, and avers that this document speaks for

9

itself. Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of the document. Except as so admitted,

10

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 24.

11

25.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 25.

12

26.

Facebook admits that it has developed items of embeddable HTML code called

13

“social plugins,” including the “Like” button. Facebook admits that certain third-party websites

14

offer social plugins in order to provide engaging and personalized social experiences to their users.

15

Facebook admits that social plugins allow people to share content using Facebook directly from

16

third-party websites. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 26.

17

27.

Facebook admits that it processes the messages of Facebook users who send or

18

receive messages through the Messages product. Facebook further admits that, at certain times, and

19

under certain circumstances, if a message sent using the Facebook Messages product included a link

20

to another website (URL) that contained a Facebook “Like” button plugin, the aggregate “Like”

21

count for that URL displayed on a social plugin may have increased. Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’

22

characterizations of its Facebook Messages product, or that its conduct provides a basis for any

23

actionable claim. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 27.

24

28.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 28.

25

29.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 29.

26

30.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 30.

27

31.

Facebook avers that the referenced documents speak for themselves. Facebook

28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct and its disclosures, or that its conduct provides a
5
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

basis for any actionable claim. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph

2

31.

3

32.

Facebook admits that it has developed items of embeddable HTML code called

4

“social plugins,” including the “Like” button. Facebook admits that certain third-party websites

5

offer social plugins. Facebook admits that social plugins allow people to share content using

6

Facebook directly from third-party websites. Facebook admits that paragraph 32 contains what

7

appears to be a partial written excerpt of audio from a Facebook video titled “Understanding Social

8

Plugins” that was posted to Facebook at one time, and Facebook avers that the document speaks for

9

itself. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 32.

10

33.

Facebook admits that social plugins allow people to share content using Facebook

11

directly from third-party websites. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in

12

paragraph 33.

13

34.

Facebook admits that paragraph 34 contains what appears to be a partial written

14

excerpt of audio from a Facebook video titled “Understanding Social Plugins” that was posted to

15

Facebook at one time, and Facebook avers that the document speaks for itself. Facebook disputes

16

Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct and its disclosures, or that its conduct provides a basis for

17

any actionable claim. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 34.

18

35.

Facebook admits that paragraph 35 purports to characterize a blog post that was

19

published on the Wall Street Journal’s website in October 2012. Facebook avers that the blog post

20

speaks for itself. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 35.

21

36.

Facebook admits that paragraph 36 purports to characterize an article that was

22

published on the Digital Trends website in October 2012. Facebook avers that the article speaks for

23

itself. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 36.

24

37.

Facebook admits that paragraph 37 purports to characterize a blog post that was

25

published on the Wall Street Journal’s website in October 2012. Facebook avers that the blog post

26

speaks for itself. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 37.

27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

38.

Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct, or that its conduct

provides a basis for any actionable claim, and Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 38.
6
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1
2
3

39.

Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct, or that its conduct

provides a basis for any actionable claim, and Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 39.
40.

Facebook admits that paragraph 40 purports to characterize an article that was

4

published on Swiss security firm High-Tech Bridge’s website in August 2013. Facebook avers that

5

the article speaks for itself. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 40.

6

41.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 41.

7

42.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 42. By way of further response,

8

Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct and its disclosures, or that its conduct

9

provides a basis for any actionable claim.

10

43.

Facebook admits that it has developed items of embeddable HTML code called

11

“social plugins,” including the “Like” button. Facebook admits that certain third-party websites

12

offer social plugins. Facebook admits that social plugins allow people to share content using

13

Facebook directly from third-party websites. By way of further response, Facebook admits that

14

paragraph 43 purports to characterize an article that was published on CNET News’ website in June

15

2010. Facebook avers that the article speaks for itself. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the

16

allegations in paragraph 43.

17

44.

Facebook admits that paragraph 44 purports to characterize an article that was

18

published on CNET News’ website in June 2010. Facebook avers that the article speaks for itself.

19

Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 44.

20

45.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 45.

21

46.

Facebook admits that paragraph 46 purports to characterize an episode of Frontline.

22

Facebook avers that the document speaks for itself. Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of

23

its conduct, or that its conduct provides a basis for any actionable claim. Facebook lacks knowledge

24

or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 46.

25
26
27

47.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 47. Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’

characterization of its conduct, or that its conduct provides a basis for any actionable claim.
48.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 48.

28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

7
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

49.

Facebook admits that it has more than one billion users. Facebook admits that

2

paragraph 49 contains what appears to be a partial excerpt of a Facebook article titled “How

3

Advertising and Sponsored Stories Works” that was available on Facebook. Facebook avers that

4

this document speaks for itself. Facebook admits that it earns revenue from advertisements it

5

displays to Facebook users, and that such advertisements may be targeted based on certain

6

information provided by users to Facebook. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations

7

in paragraph 49.

8
9

50.

Facebook admits that paragraph 50 purports to characterize a third-party study

published by Nielsen OCR. Facebook avers that this document speaks for itself. Facebook admits

10

that it earns revenue from advertisements it displays to Facebook users, and that such advertisements

11

may be targeted based on certain information provided by users to Facebook. Except as so admitted,

12

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 50.

13

51.

Facebook admits that paragraph 51 purports to characterize an article titled “Private

14

Traits and Attributes are Predictable from Digital Records of Human Behavior” that was published

15

in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America in 2013.

16

Facebook admits that paragraph 51 purports to characterize an article titled “Social Influence in

17

Social Advertising: Evidence from Field Experiments” that was published in Proceedings of the

18

13th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce in 2012. Facebook avers that these documents

19

speak for themselves. Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct, or that its

20

conduct provides a basis for any actionable claim. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the

21

allegations in paragraph 51.

22

52.

Facebook admits that it receives, processes, and stores information shared by users on

23

Facebook, including when users send messages. Facebook avers that it uses all information shared

24

on Facebook in accordance with its Statement of Rights and Responsibilities and its Data Use

25

Policy, and avers that these documents speak for themselves. By way of further response, Facebook

26

admits that paragraph 52 purports to characterize an article titled “Information For Law Enforcement

27

Authorities” that was available on Facebook’s Safety Center. Facebook avers that the document

28

speaks for itself. Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct and disclosures, or

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

8
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

that its conduct provides a basis for any actionable claim. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies

2

the allegations in paragraph 52.

3

53.

Facebook admits that paragraph 53 contains what appears to be a partial excerpt of a

4

statement by the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Facebook avers that this document speaks for

5

itself. The remaining allegations in paragraph 53 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

6

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 53

7

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

8

54.

Facebook admits that paragraph 54 contains what appears to be a partial excerpt of a

9

statement by Senator Patrick Leahy, and Facebook avers that this document speaks for itself. The

10

remaining allegations in paragraph 54 are conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is

11

required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 54 are deemed

12

in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

13

55.

Facebook admits that paragraph 55 purports to characterize the “Fair Information

14

Practice Principles” published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Facebook

15

avers that this document speak for itself. The remaining allegations in paragraph 55 are conclusions

16

of law for which no responsive pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent

17

these allegations are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. Facebook

18

disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct, or that its conduct provides a basis for any

19

actionable claim.

20

56.

21
22
23
24
25

provides a basis for any actionable claim, and Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 56.
57.

28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct, or that its conduct

provides a basis for any actionable claim, and Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 57.
58.

Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct, or that its conduct

provides a basis for any actionable claim, and Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 58.
“VII. CLASS ALLEGATIONS”

26
27

Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct, or that its conduct

59.

Facebook admits that Plaintiffs purport to bring a class action under Rule 23 of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The remaining allegations in paragraph 59 are conclusions of law
9
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

for which no responsive pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent these

2

allegations are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further

3

response, Facebook avers that this action may not be maintained as a class action.

4

In response to footnote 2 to paragraph 59, Facebook admits that what it understands to be the

5

“practice” challenged in this action—incrementing a “Like” count when users shared URLs in

6

Facebook messages in certain circumstances—ceased in October 2012.

7

60.

Facebook admits that Plaintiffs purport to exclude certain entities and individuals

8

from the putative class. By way of further response, Facebook avers that this action may not be

9

maintained as a class action. Except as so admitted, Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph

10
11

60.
61.

The allegations in paragraph 61 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

12

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 61

13

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

14

Facebook avers that this action may not be maintained as a class action.

15

62.

The allegations in paragraph 62 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

16

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 62

17

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

18

Facebook avers that this action may not be maintained as a class action.

19

63.

The allegations in paragraph 63 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

20

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 63

21

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

22

Facebook avers that this action may not be maintained as a class action.

23

64.

The allegations in paragraph 64 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

24

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 64

25

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

26

Facebook avers that this action may not be maintained as a class action.

27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

65.

The allegations in paragraph 65 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 65
10
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

2

Facebook avers that this action may not be maintained as a class action.

3

66.

The allegations in paragraph 66 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

4

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 66

5

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

6

Facebook avers that this action may not be maintained as a class action.

7

67.

The allegations in paragraph 67 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

8

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 67

9

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

10
11

Facebook avers that this action may not be maintained as a class action.
68.

The allegations in paragraph 68 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

12

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 68

13

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

14

Facebook avers that this action may not be maintained as a class action.
“VIII. THE CLASS REPRESENTATIVES”

15
16
17
18
19
20
21

69.

Facebook lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations

in paragraph 69.
70.

Facebook lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations

in paragraph 70.
71.

Facebook lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations

in paragraph 71.

22

“IX. CAUSES OF ACTION

23

COUNT ONE

24

(Violations of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 et seq.)”

25
26
27

72.

Responding to paragraph 72, Facebook incorporates by reference its responses to the

preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.

28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

11
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

73.

Facebook admits that Plaintiffs purport to bring claims under these statutes.

2

Facebook denies that Plaintiffs are entitled to any relief and/or remedies under any of these laws, or

3

that this action may be maintained as a class action.

4

74.

Facebook admits the allegations in paragraph 74.

5

75.

Facebook admits that it presently has over 166 million users in the United States.

6

Facebook further admits that it presently has more than one billion users. The remaining allegations

7

in paragraph 75 are conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required and which are

8

therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 75 are deemed in whole or in part to be

9

factual, Facebook denies them.

10

76.

The allegations in paragraph 76 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

11

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 76

12

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

13

77.

The allegations in paragraph 77 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

14

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 77

15

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

16

78.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 78.

17

79.

The allegations in paragraph 79 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

18

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 79

19

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

20

80.

The allegations in paragraph 80 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

21

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 80

22

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

23

81.

The allegations in paragraph 81 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

24

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 81

25

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

26

82.

The allegations in paragraph 82 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

27

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 82

28

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

12
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

83.

The allegations in paragraph 83 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

2

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 83

3

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

4

84.

The allegations in paragraph 84 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

5

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 84

6

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

7

85.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 85.

8

86.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 86.

9

87.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 87.

10

88.

The allegations in paragraph 88 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

11

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 88

12

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

13
14
15

89.

Facebook disputes Plaintiffs’ characterization of its conduct, or that its conduct

provides a basis for any actionable claim, and Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 89.
90.

The allegations in paragraph 90 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

16

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 90

17

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

18

91.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 91.

19

92.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 92.

20

93.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 93.

21

94.

The allegations in paragraph 94 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

22

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 94

23

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

24

“COUNT TWO

25

(Violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act,

26

Cal. Penal Code §§ 630, et seq.)”

27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

95.

Responding to paragraph 95, Facebook incorporates by reference its responses to the

preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
13
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

96.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

2

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to this

3

paragraph is required. To the extent a response is required, Facebook denies that Plaintiffs are

4

entitled to any relief and/or remedies under any of these laws, or that this action may be maintained

5

as a class action. The allegations in paragraph 96 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

6

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the remaining allegations in

7

paragraph 96 are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

8

97.

Facebook admits that the language quoted in paragraph 97 appears in California

9

Penal Code § 630. Facebook denies that the language has anything to do with Facebook’s conduct

10

or renders unlawful any of Facebook’s conduct. By way of further response, Facebook avers that in

11

its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal

12

Code § 632 with prejudice.

13

98.

The allegations in paragraph 98 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

14

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 98

15

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

16

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claim

17

under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice.

18

99.

Facebook lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations

19

in paragraph 99. By way of further response, Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23,

20

2014, the Court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice.

21

100.

The allegations in paragraph 100 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

22

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 100

23

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

24

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claim

25

under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice.

26

101.

The allegations in paragraph 101 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

27

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 101

28

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

14
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claim

2

under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice.

3

102.

The allegations in paragraph 102 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

4

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 102

5

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response,

6

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claim

7

under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice.

8

“A.

Violations of California Penal Code § 631(a)”

9

103.

Facebook admits the allegations in paragraph 103.

10

104.

The allegations in paragraph 104 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

11

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 104

12

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

13

105.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 105.

14

106.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 106.

15

107.

The allegations in paragraph 107 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

16

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 107

17

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

18

108.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 108.

19

109.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 109.

20

110.

The allegations in paragraph 110 are conclusions of law for which no responsive

21

pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 110

22

are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook denies them.

23

111.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 111.

24

112.

Facebook denies the allegations in paragraph 112.

25

“B.

Violations of California Penal Code § 632”

26

113.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

27

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to

28

paragraph 113 is required.

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

15
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

114.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

2

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to

3

paragraph 114 is required.

4

115.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

5

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to

6

paragraph 115 is required.

7

116.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

8

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to

9

paragraph 116 is required.

10

117.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

11

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to

12

paragraph 117 is required.

13

118.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

14

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to

15

paragraph 118 is required.

16

119.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

17

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to

18

paragraph 119 is required.

19

120.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

20

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to

21

paragraph 120 is required.

22

121.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

23

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to

24

paragraph 121 is required.

25

122.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

26

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to

27

paragraph 122 is required. By way of further response, the allegations in paragraph 122 are

28

conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

16
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

the extent the allegations in paragraph 122 are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook

2

denies them.

3

123.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

4

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Penal Code § 632 with prejudice, and therefore no response to

5

paragraph 123 is required. By way of further response, the allegations in paragraph 123 are

6

conclusions of law for which no responsive pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To

7

the extent the allegations in paragraph 123 are deemed in whole or in part to be factual, Facebook

8

denies them.

9

“COUNT THREE

10

(Violations of California’s Unfair Competition

11

Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq.)”

12
13
14

124.

Responding to paragraph 124, Facebook incorporates by reference its responses to

the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
125.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

15

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Business & Professions Code § 17200 with prejudice, and

16

therefore no response to paragraph 125 is required.

17

126.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

18

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Business & Professions Code § 17200 with prejudice, and

19

therefore no response to paragraph 126 is required.

20

127.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

21

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Business & Professions Code § 17200 with prejudice, and

22

therefore no response to paragraph 127 is required.

23

128.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

24

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Business & Professions Code § 17200 with prejudice, and

25

therefore no response to paragraph 128 is required.

26

129.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

27

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Business & Professions Code § 17200 with prejudice, and

28

therefore no response to paragraph 129 is required.

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

17
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

130.

Facebook avers that in its Order dated December 23, 2014, the Court dismissed

2

Plaintiffs’ claim under California Business & Professions Code § 17200 with prejudice, and

3

therefore no response to paragraph 130 is required.
“JURY TRIAL DEMANDED”

4
5

Plaintiffs’ paragraph is a demand for a jury trial, to which no response is required.
“PRAYER FOR RELIEF”

6
7

The allegations set forth in Plaintiffs’ “Prayer for Relief” are conclusions of law for which no

8

responsive pleading is required and which are therefore denied. To the extent the allegations in

9

paragraph 1 through 10 of Plaintiffs’ “Prayer for Relief” are deemed in whole or in part to be

10

factual, Facebook denies them. By way of further response, Facebook denies that Plaintiffs’

11

purported class is certifiable or that Plaintiffs or members of the purported class suffered injury or

12

damage of any kind. Facebook denies that Plaintiffs or the members of the purported classes are

13

entitled to any relief on any of their claims.

14
15
16
17
18

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Without assuming the burden to prove that which properly falls on Plaintiffs, Facebook pleads
the following separate and additional defenses.
FIRST SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Facebook denies all allegations not expressly admitted and specifically reserves all

19

affirmative or other defenses that it may have against Plaintiffs and the putative class. It is not

20

necessary at this time for Facebook to delineate such defenses against the putative class because no

21

class has been certified, and the putative class members are not parties to this litigation.

22
23
24
25
26
27

SECOND SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and each and every purported cause of action, fails to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted.
THIRD SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ claims are barred in whole or in part by the First Amendment of the United States
Constitution and/or by Article 1, Section 2 of the California Constitution.

28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

18
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

FOURTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE

2

Plaintiffs’ claims and the claims of the putative class members are barred, in whole or in part,

3

because Plaintiffs and the putative class members lack standing under Article III of the United States

4

Constitution.

5
6

FIFTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ claims and the claims of the putative class members are barred, in whole or in part,

7

because Plaintiffs and the putative class members lack standing under the Electronic

8

Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510, et seq.

9
10

SIXTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ claims and the claims of the putative class members are barred, in whole or in part,

11

because Plaintiffs and the putative class members lack standing under the California Invasion of

12

Privacy Act, California Penal Code §§ 630, et seq.

13
14
15

SEVENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
This Court lacks jurisdiction over some or all of the claims asserted by the Plaintiffs and/or
the purported class.

16
17

EIGHTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs and the putative class members have not sustained any injury or damage as a result

18

of any actions allegedly taken by Facebook, and are thus barred from asserting any claims against

19

Facebook.

20

NINTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE

21

Plaintiffs’ damages—including actual, punitive, compensatory, exemplary, or statutory

22
23
24

damages—are limited by the terms of the contracts between Facebook and Plaintiffs.
TENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ claims are barred, in whole or in part, because the damages sought by Plaintiffs and

25

the putative class members are speculative and remote and impossible to ascertain.

26

ELEVENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE

27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

Plaintiffs’ claims are barred, in whole or in part, because the damages alleged to have been
suffered are not compensable under the law.
19
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1
2
3

TWELFTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate their damages, if any, and any recovery should be reduced or
denied accordingly.

4

THIRTEENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE

5

Plaintiffs are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands from maintaining each and every

6

purported claim against Facebook, or from recovering any damages thereunder from Facebook.

7
8

FOURTEENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs have consented to and/or ratified the conduct alleged in the Complaint.

9

FIFTEENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE

10

Plaintiffs’ claims and the claims of the putative class are barred, in whole or in part, by

11

contracts and/or agreements they entered into with Facebook.

12
13

SIXTEENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
If Plaintiffs have sustained any damages as alleged in the Complaint, which Facebook denies,

14

such damages were proximately caused by subsequent and intervening or superseding acts of the

15

Plaintiffs and/or of third parties, such that Facebook is not responsible or liable for any damages

16

allegedly suffered by Plaintiffs.

17

SEVENTEENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE

18

Plaintiffs’ claims and the claims of the putative class are barred, in whole or in part, because

19

any recovery by Plaintiffs would constitute unjust enrichment of Plaintiffs. In particular, Plaintiffs’

20

claims and the claims of the putative class are barred, in whole or in part, to the extent that Plaintiffs

21

have used any of Facebook’s services that are enabled by the practices that Plaintiffs seek to

22

challenge.

23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

EIGHTEENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ Complaint and each purported cause of action are barred, in whole or in part, by the
applicable statutes of limitation and statutes of repose.
NINETEENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ Complaint and each purported cause of action are barred, in whole or in part, by the
doctrine of laches.
20
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

TWENTIETH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ Complaint and each purported cause of action are barred, in whole or in part, by the
doctrine of estoppel.
TWENTY-FIRST SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ Complaint and each purported cause of action are barred, in whole or in part, by the
doctrine of waiver.
TWENTY-SECOND SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ Complaint and each purported cause of action are barred, in whole or in part, to the
extent there is an adequate remedy at law.

10

TWENTY-THIRD SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE

11

Plaintiffs’ Complaint and each purported cause of action are barred, in whole or in part,

12

because Plaintiffs and members of the putative class proceeded with knowledge and/or awareness of

13

the occurrences that form the bases of their claims as alleged in the Complaint.

14
15

TWENTY-FOURTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs may not maintain this lawsuit as a class action because the purported claims of the

16

putative plaintiff class representatives are not sufficiently typical of those of the purported class

17

members, common issues of fact and law do not predominate over individual issues and liability and

18

damages cannot be proven on a class-wide basis, the putative plaintiff class representatives will not

19

adequately represent the purported plaintiff class, the putative plaintiff class is not ascertainable, the

20

proposed class action would not be manageable, and a class action is not a superior method for

21

adjudicating the purported claims set forth in Plaintiffs’ Complaint.

22
23
24
25
26

TWENTY-FIFTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs may not maintain this lawsuit as a class action because the interests of the purported
class members are in conflict with each other.
TWENTY-SIXTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Any attempt to require Facebook to identify, locate or notify absent persons on whose behalf

27

this action is allegedly prosecuted would violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth

28

Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

21
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

TWENTY-SEVENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE

2

As a matter of constitutional right and substantive due process, Facebook would be entitled to

3

contest by jury trial its liability to any particular individual plaintiff, even if the representatives of the

4

purported plaintiff class prevail on their claims. Trying this case as a class action would violate the

5

United States Constitution and the Constitution of California.

6
7
8

TWENTY-EIGHTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ claims and the claims of the putative class are barred, in whole or in part, because
at all relevant times, Facebook’s actions were a necessary incident to the rendition of services.

9
10
11

TWENTY-NINTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ claims and the claims of the putative class are barred, in whole or in part, because
at all relevant times, Facebook’s alleged conduct was authorized.

12
13

THIRTIETH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ claims and the claims of the putative class are barred, in whole or in part, because

14

at all relevant times, Facebook’s actions were within the ordinary course of business.

15

THIRTY-FIRST SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE

16

Plaintiffs’ claims and the claims of the putative class are barred, in whole or in part, because

17

to the extent Facebook engaged in any of the alleged acts, omissions, or conduct, it did so with

18

justification.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25

THIRTY-SECOND SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ application of the California Invasion of Privacy Act in this case is contrary to
public policy.
THIRTY-THIRD SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Plaintiffs’ remaining state law claim is preempted by federal law.
THIRTY-FOURTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Statutory damages under 18 U.S.C. § 2510 should not be awarded or should otherwise be

26

limited because: (i) such an award would violate the substantive and procedural safeguards

27

guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, by Article 1,

28

Section 7 of the California Constitution, and by the common law; and (ii) the imposition of such an

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

22
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

award would constitute an excessive fine or penalty under the Eighth Amendment to the United

2

States Constitution and Article 1, Section 17 of the California Constitution.

3
4

THIRTY-FIFTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Per 18 U.S.C § 2520(d), Facebook acted in good faith reliance on a court warrant or order, a

5

grand jury subpoena, a legislative authorization, or a statutory authorization; a request of an

6

investigative or law enforcement officer under 18 U.S.C § 2518(7); and/or a good faith determination

7

that 18 U.S.C § 2511(3) or 18 U.S.C § 2511(2)(i) permitted the conduct complained of.

8

THIRTY-SIXTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE

9

The Complaint and each cause of action are vague, ambiguous, and uncertain. Facebook

10

reserves the right to add additional defenses as the factual bases for each of Plaintiffs’ claims and

11

allegations become known.

12
13

THIRTY-SEVENTH SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
Facebook has insufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a basis as to whether

14

it may have additional, as yet unstated, separate defenses available. Facebook has not knowingly or

15

intentionally waived any applicable affirmative defenses and reserves the right to raise additional

16

affirmative defenses as they become known to it through discovery in this matter. Facebook further

17

reserves the right to amend its answer and/or affirmative defenses accordingly and/or to delete

18

affirmative defenses that it determines are not applicable during the course of subsequent discovery.

19

PRAYER

20

WHEREFORE, Facebook prays for the following relief:

21

A.

22

Facebook;

23

B.

That this Court finds that this suit cannot be maintained as a class action;

24

C.

That Plaintiffs and the members of the putative class take nothing by Plaintiffs’

25

That judgment on the Complaint, and on each cause of action, be entered in favor of

Complaint;

26

D.

That the request for declaratory and injunctive relief be denied;

27

E.

That Facebook be awarded its costs incurred, including reasonable attorneys’ fees; and

28

F.

For such other and/or further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

23
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1
2
3

Dated: February 6, 2015

Respectfully submitted,
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
By:

/s/
Joshua A. Jessen

4
5

Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

24
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1
2
3
4

JURY DEMAND
Defendant Facebook, Inc. hereby demands a jury trial on all issues so triable.
Dated: February 6, 2015

Respectfully submitted,
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

5
By:

/s/
Joshua A. Jessen

6
7

Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC.

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

25
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH