AirTag Stalking Victims Lack ‘Legal Basis’ to Sue Apple, Says Apple’s Reply

further support of its Oct. 27 motion to dismiss their Oct. 6 first amended complaint (see 2310300030). Though the AirTag’s intended purpose is to find lost items like keys or luggage, “its popularity has soared as the preeminent tool for stalking and abuse due to its efficacy, low price point, and ease of use,” said the plaintiffs’ Nov. 13 opposition to Apple’s motion to dismiss (see 2311140041). But case after case, in any jurisdiction whose law the plaintiffs try to invoke, “establishes that Apple owes no legal duty to individuals with whom it has no relationship to prevent the misuse of its product by others,” said Apple’s reply. Only those third parties “wrongfully misusing” Apple products, not Apple, “can be considered a legal cause” of the plaintiffs’ alleged injuries, it said. Apple also can’t be held liable for statements that it didn’t make, “and that it has no legal duty to correct,” it said. Apple didn’t invade any plaintiff’s “privacy interests,” it said. “Only third parties wrongfully misusing Apple products did,” it said. The plaintiffs “have no other legal basis to sue Apple,” it said. Their opposition “fails to supply the missing legal theory,” it said. Though the plaintiffs’ opposition relies heavily on new assertions not found in the first amended complaint, the complaint should be dismissed with prejudice whether the court “considers those assertions or not,” it said. Either way, the plaintiffs “offer no factual or legal basis to overcome the conclusion” that third parties, not Apple, are responsible for their injuries, it said.