Granting Google Limited Remand Would Be ‘Pointless’: Plaintiff-Appellants
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals should deny Google’s motion for limited remand to allow the district court to clarify its order of dismissal “for the simple reason that there is no fundamental dispute here,” said the plaintiff-appellants’ opposition…
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.
Friday (docket 22-16993). They are six Chrome users who seek to reverse the dismissal of their claims that Google unlawfully collected their personal data despite their having declined to sync their browsers to their Google accounts. “The parties agree that the district court granted Google’s motion for summary judgment and closed the case,” said their opposition. Google’s “real objective” in seeking limited remand “is not clarification but something else,” it said. If the 9th Circuit were to grant limited remand, “Google will ask the district court to substantially alter its original opinion by appending two full pages of Google’s preferred legal analysis and discussion to its order granting summary judgment,” it said. But the district court already ruled it would deny Google’s proposed relief as improper, it said. It would therefore be “pointless” to grant the motion, it said.