Calif. Judge Denies Meta's Motion to Relate Meta Pixel Privacy Cases

U.S. District Judge for Northern California William Orrick denied defendant Meta’s administrative motion to consider whether two privacy cases -- Jane Doe v. Hey Favor and Jane Doe v. GoodRx -- should be related, said a Tuesday order (docket 3:23-cv-00059) in the San Francisco court. GoodRx, a nonparty in the Hey Favor case, and defendant Google, filed oppositions to Meta’s request. The two cases don't “concern substantially the same parties, property, transaction or event,” said Google's response. GoodRx’s opposition cited Meta’s contention the two cases are related because both name Meta as a defendant and both plaintiffs “allege that they used platforms on which [software development kits] and pixels were installed,” and that as a result, “Meta and other defendants received sensitive health information about them.” No other parties overlap between the two matters, GoodRx noted.