Complaint (2021-04-06) — Children's Health Defense v. Facebook, Inc., et al.

What This Document Is

Facebook, Inc.'s and Mark Zuckerberg's 3-page Statement of Recent Decision, filed April 6, 2021 under Civil Local Rule 7-3(d)(2) in CHD v. Facebook, Inc., et al. (N.D. Cal.). It brings to Judge Illston's attention Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi's March 31, 2021 decision in Daniels v. Alphabet Inc., No. 5:20-cv-04687, 2021 WL 1222166 (N.D. Cal.), attaching a copy as Exhibit A (Doc. 85-1).

Factual Summary

The statement notes the Daniels decision issued March 31, 2021 — after briefing had completed on both the Facebook defendants' motion to dismiss the SAC and CHD's motion to supplement — making it appropriate for consideration under Civil L.R. 7-3(d)(2), which permits counsel to file a citation to and copy of a relevant judicial opinion published after opposition or reply briefing "without argument." The single sentence of substantive positioning states: "The Daniels decision is relevant to the Facebook Defendants' argument that they cannot be considered government actors for purposes of Plaintiff's Bivens claim. See 2021 WL 1222166, at *5-7." Signed by Sonal N. Mehta (WilmerHale) on April 6, 2021, with a certificate of CM/ECF service.

Key Facts

Filed 2021-04-06: Facebook/Zuckerberg's Civil L.R. 7-3(d)(2) notice of Daniels v. Alphabet Inc. (DeMarchi, M.J., Mar. 31, 2021), attached as Exhibit A (Doc. 85-1).
Offered against CHD's Bivens/state-action theory: Daniels rejected government-actor arguments against a platform (YouTube/Alphabet) in a closely analogous COVID-era content-moderation suit, at the pages cited (*5-7).
Filed in the pre-hearing window before the consolidated May 5, 2021 hearing.

Source Caveats

Per Civil L.R. 7-3(d)(2), the filing itself contains no argument beyond the relevance citation.

Date: 2021-04-06

Full text

CASE NO.: 3:20-CV-05787-SI

FACEBOOK DEFENDANTS’ STATEMENT
                                                                                                                                                                 OF RECENT DECISION

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SONAL N. MEHTA (SBN 222086)
Sonal.Mehta@wilmerhale.com
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
 HALE AND DORR LLP
2600 El Camino Real, Suite 400
Palo Alto, California 94306
Telephone: (650) 858-6000
Facsimile: (650) 858-6100
ARI HOLTZBLATT (pro hac vice)
Ari.Holtzblatt@wilmerhale.com
MOLLY M. JENNINGS (pro hac vice)
Molly.Jennings@wilmerhale.com
ALLISON SCHULTZ (pro hac vice)
Allison.Schultz@wilmerhale.com
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
 HALE AND DORR LLP
1875 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 663-6000
Facsimile: (202) 663-6363
Attorneys for Defendants
FACEBOOK, INC. and
MARK ZUCKERBERG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
 CHILDREN’S HEALTH DEFENSE,
Plaintiff,
v.
FACEBOOK, INC., ET AL.,
Defendants.

Case No.  3:20-cv-05787-SI

DEFENDANTS FACEBOOK INC.’S
AND MARK ZUCKERBERG’S
STATEMENT OF RECENT
DECISION

Hon. Susan Illston

Case 3:20-cv-05787-SI   Document 85   Filed 04/06/21   Page 1 of 3

CASE NO.: 3:20-CV-05787-SI
- 1 -
FACEBOOK DEFENDANTS’ STATEMENT
OF RECENT DECISION

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3(d)(2), Defendants Facebook, Inc. and Mark Zuckerberg
respectfully submit this Statement of Recent Decision to bring to this Court’s attention the decision
of Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi of the Northern District of California in Daniels v.
Alphabet Inc., No. 5:20-cv-04687, 2021 WL 1222166, at *3 (N.D. Cal., Mar. 31, 2021).  A true and
correct copy of that decision is attached hereto as Exhibit A.  The decision was filed on March 31,
2021 after briefing was completed on the Facebook Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Second
Amended Complaint and on Plaintiff’s Motion to Supplement its Second Amended Complaint in
the above-captioned case.  The decision is therefore appropriate for consideration by the Court.  See
Civil L.R. 7-3(d)(2) (“Before the noticed hearing date, counsel may bring to the Court’s attention a
relevant judicial opinion published after the date the opposition or reply was filed by filing and
serving a Statement of Recent Decision, containing a citation to and providing a copy of the new
opinion—without argument.”).  The Daniels decision is relevant to the Facebook Defendants’
argument that they cannot be considered government actors for purposes of Plaintiff’s Bivens claim.
See 2021 WL 1222166, at *5-7.
Dated: April 6, 2021

WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
   HALE AND DORR LLP

By:
/s/ Sonal N. Mehta

SONAL N. MEHTA

Attorney for Defendants
Facebook, Inc. and Mark Zuckerberg

Case 3:20-cv-05787-SI   Document 85   Filed 04/06/21   Page 2 of 3

- 1 -
CASE NO.: 3:20-CV-05787-SI

      FACEBOOK DEFENDANTS’ STATEMENT
                                                                                                                                                   OF RECENT DECISION

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on April 6, 2021, I electronically filed the above document with the
Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF which will send electronic notification of such filing to all
registered counsel.

Dated:  April 6, 2021
By:
/s/ Sonal N. Mehta

Sonal N. Mehta
Case 3:20-cv-05787-SI   Document 85   Filed 04/06/21   Page 3 of 3

File and source

File: gov.uscourts.cand.364478.85.0.pdf
Size: 131,673 bytes
SHA-256: 82229e7fc5aad986a16e4f3db75c75bf77be878502f2c8200438503d86554c2a
Our copy: gov.uscourts.cand.364478.85.0.pdf
Original: archive.org