PBS, Plaintiff Continue Sparring Over Notices of Supplemental Authority
Plaintiff Jazmine Harris and defendant PBS continue trading notices of supplemental authority back and forth to bolster their positions in Harris’ class action accusing the network of Video Privacy Protection Act wrongdoing and PBS’ motion to dismiss her claims. In…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
his March 7 opinion in Goldstein v. Fandango Media (docket 9:21-cv-80466), U.S. District Judge Kenneth Mara for Southern Florida denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss “in a case with similar claims and factual allegations” to those asserted by Harris, said the plaintiff's notice Monday (docket 1:22-cv-02456) in U.S. District Court for Northern Georgia in Atlanta. Mara said the plaintiffs “plausibly allege” VPPA violations resulting from defendant’s practice of disclosing its users’ personally identifiable information (PII) via the Facebook tracking pixel tool that’s installed on its website, said the notice. Mara’s opinion is relevant to Harris’ argument that, based on the facts alleged in the complaint, she “sufficiently alleged a violation of the VPPA, particularly at the motion to dismiss stage,” it said. PBS filed its own notice of supplemental authority last month documenting the Southern District of New York’s dismissal Feb. 17 of a VPPA complaint in Martin v. Meredith (docket 1:22-cv-04776), alleging the same VPPA claim plaintiff Harris is asserting against PBS (see 2302220035). The SDNY based its dismissal on its finding that the alleged transmissions of data didn’t qualify as PII under the VPPA, just as PBS is asserting against Harris.