Proposed Order Denying Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike — Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corporation (Dkt. 34.1)

Summary

A proposed order submitted by the plaintiffs in Cat Brooks and Rasheed Shabazz v. Thomson Reuters Corporation, Case No. 3:21-cv-1418-EMC, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, filed 05/19/21 as Document 34-1 (2 pages), a putative class action. The proposed order would deny Thomson Reuters' motion to dismiss and anti-SLAPP motion to strike, finding the plaintiffs plausibly allege unfair competition, common law right of publicity and unjust enrichment claims under California law. It would also find that the California Consumer Privacy Act, the Communications Decency Act, federal copyright law and the First Amendment do not bar the claims. The signature line for Judge Edward M. Chen is left blank; it is a proposal, not a ruling.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

       Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC       Document 34-1   Filed 05/19/21   Page 1 of 2



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9
                           UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
10
                             NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
                                  SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
12
     CAT BROOKS and RASHEED SHABAZZ,            Case No. 3:21-cv-1418-EMC
13   individually and on behalf of all others
     similarly situated,
14                                              [PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING
15             Plaintiffs,                      MOTION TO DISMISS AND
        v.                                      MOTION TO STRIKE
16
     THOMSON REUTERS CORPORATION,
17
              Defendant.
18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

             [PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO
                                      STRIKE
                               Case No. 3:21-cv-1418-EMC
        Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC            Document 34-1         Filed 05/19/21       Page 2 of 2



1        Before the Court is Defendant Thomson Reuters’ motion to dismiss and motion to strike.

2    Having considered the parties’ briefing and oral argument, as well as Plaintiffs’ complaint, the

3    Court finds that Plaintiffs’ allegations plausibly support their claims.

4        Specifically, Thomson Reuters’ actions, as alleged, constitute an unlawful and unfair business

5    practice under California’s Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200, et seq., a

6    violation of California’s common law right of publicity, and unjust enrichment under California

7    law. Plaintiffs’ claims for equitable relief may also proceed because there is no adequate and

8    complete remedy at law.

9        The Court also finds that the California Consumer Privacy Act, Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1798.100,

10   et seq., the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § 230, federal copyright law, and the First

11   Amendment do not bar Plaintiffs’ claims against Thomson Reuters.

12       Finally, the Court denies Thomson Reuters’ anti-SLAPP motion to strike for three reasons.

13   Plaintiffs’ claims fall squarely within the law’s public-interest exception, Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §

14   425.17(b), they do not describe protected activity, Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 425.16(b)(1); and there

15   is a reasonable probability Plaintiffs will prevail on their claims. See Makaeff v. Trump Univ., LLC,

16   715 F.3d 254, 261 (9th Cir. 2013).

17       For all these reasons, the Court DENIES Thomson Reuters’ motion to dismiss and motion to

18   strike.

19
20       IT IS SO ORDERED.

21

22
      Dated: _______________, 2021
23                                                              Hon. Edward M. Chen
                                                                United States District Judge
24

25

26

27

28
                                              1
               [PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO
                                        STRIKE
                                 Case No. 3:21-cv-1418-EMC


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.cand.374304.34.1.pdf

Size

74,652 bytes

SHA-256

1de083941fe01d066bd17fb308b1cf863e26593d867afc3309ed847ea6a3b4f2

Our copy

gov.uscourts.cand.374304.34.1.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)