Dismissal of CIPA Case vs. Ford ‘Relevant’ to Tonal’s Own Motion to Dismiss: Notice

The March 21 decision in U.S. District Court for Southern California in San Diego granting Ford’s motion to dismiss a California Invasion of Privacy Act complaint is “relevant” to defendant Tonal Systems’ own motion to dismiss plaintiff Julie Jones’ CIPA class action in the same court for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted (see 2308300028), said Tonal’s notice Tuesday (docket 3:23-cv-01267). Jones alleges Tonal, a maker of home gym equipment, violated the CIPA and the state’s Unfair Competition Law when it used software from a third-party vendor, Drift, to secretly eavesdrop on the private conversations of users of the chat features on Tonal’s website (see 2307110047). Tonal’s motion to dismiss was fully briefed, and the motion hearing was held Oct. 18, said the notice. Jones lacks a “viable statutory claim for wiretapping” under the CIPA, said Tonal’s motion to dismiss. In the Ford case, plaintiff Rebeka Rodriguez alleged that the automaker secretly enables and allows a third-party spyware company to eavesdrop on the private conversations of everyone who visits Ford’s website and communicates through its chat feature. She alleged that the spyware company then monetized that data by sharing it with other third parties, which used it to bombard the unsuspecting visitors with targeted marketing, all without their informed consent. The court construed Rodriguez's argument in her opposition to the motion to dismiss as declining to pursue a claim against Ford for direct liability under the first three clauses of the CIPA’s Section 631(a). It dismissed any such claim against Ford with prejudice because amendment would be futile.