JetBlue Documents 'Irrelevant' in Support of Its Motion to Dismiss, Says Plaintiff
JetBlue “improperly attempts to interject irrelevant documents beyond the pleadings” in support of its motion to dismiss a privacy complaint, said plaintiff Anne Lightoller Tuesday in a memorandum (docket 3:23-cv-00361) opposing the airline’s request for judicial notice (RJN) in U.S.…
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.
District Court for Southern California in San Diego. Lightoller’s February complaint (see 2302270025) alleges JetBlue used technology from FullStory to record her mouse movements, clicks and keystrokes on websites she visited, in violation of California's Invasion of Privacy Act. The “irrelevant documents” produced by JetBlue included documents “purporting to be screen-shots” from the JetBlue website, including a cookie banner and privacy policy, along with complaints filed in other litigation pertaining to violation of privacy rights by other websites using session replay technologies, Lightoller said. The plaintiff claimed JetBlue’s documents were submitted to “bolster a fact-intensive implied consent assertion” and to “discredit the allegations” in her complaint based on the allegations of unrelated complaints asserting similar privacy rights issues. Lightoller’s class action against JetBlue was one of some 10 “cookie-cutter” suits filed by law firm Hausfeld, said JetBlue’s April motion to dismiss (see 2304270033). Documents in JetBlue’s RJN included Lightoller’s similar privacy complaint against The Cheesecake Factory in February for alleged violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act, along with other privacy complaints. Lightoller voluntarily dismissed that complaint (docket 3:23-cv-00272) without prejudice last week. The Cheesecake Factory hadn’t served an answer or motion for summary judgment in the action, which had a May 22 deadline for responding to her Feb. 10 class action.