Plaintiff Blasts Tonal’s Opposition to Her Remand Motion as ‘Hollow Act of Panic’
Tonal Systems’ opposition to plaintiff Julie Jones’ motion to remand her California Invasion of Privacy Act case against the maker of smart home fitness equipment to state court (see 2309010044) “is a hollow act of panic that recklessly casts aspersions…
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.
when it comes up short on logic,” said Jones’ reply Thursday (docket 3:23-cv-01267) in U.S. District Court for Southern California in San Diego in support of her remand motion. Jones alleges the company uses third parties' software to “secretly wiretap and eavesdrop on the private conversations of users of the chat features on Tonal’s website in real time.” Tonal’s opposition “offers nothing but an endlessly circular argument,” said Jones’ reply. The defendant argues Jones didn’t supply evidence to support remand but then argues she “should be denied all evidence that could support remand,” it said. Tonal so argues while “ignoring” 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals precedent that fully supports Jones’ request for jurisdictional discovery, the reply said. Tonal is also incorrect “on the applicable legal standard for determining class member citizenship,” it said. Jones doesn’t need to prove every class member’s intent to remain in California, it said. She rather “is entitled to a reasonable inference that each class member intended to remain where they resided at their last known location” July 7 when Tonal removed her complaint to the Southern District of California, it said. Ultimately, the only point Tonal “successfully makes” in its opposition is that it “dreads” that Jones’ “chosen forum will hear her case,” it said.