On February 2, 2021, Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted-in-part and denied-in-part Defendant Alphabet, Inc.’s (“Google”) motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and Rule 12(b)(6).

Plaintiff brought claims alleging that Google uses an internal program called “Android Lockbox” to improperly monitor and collect sensitive personal data when users use third-party non-Google applications (“apps”) on their Android smartphones. Such data is alleged to include when/how often the non-Google apps are used and the amount of time a user spends on the non-Google apps. Plaintiff also alleges that Google’s Privacy Policy does not adequately disclose or seek consent from users to collect this sensitive personal data.

Judge van Keulen denied Google’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of Article III standing, rejecting Google’s argument that Plaintiff had consented to the alleged data collection. Furthermore, Judge van Keulen denied Google’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim under California Civil Code § 1709, California Unfair Competition Law, breach of contract, and request for relief under the Declaratory Judgment Act, and granted Plaintiff leave to amend his California constitutional and common-law privacy claims, California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, and California’s Invasion of Privacy Act claims.

Lowey Dannenberg’s Christian Levis is leading the prosecution in this ongoing class action. The case is McCoy v. Alphabet, Inc., No. 20-cv-05427 (N.D. Cal.) and the opinion can be found here:

Please contact or Christian Levis (clevis@lowey.com), Anthony Christina (achristina@lowey.com), or Amanda Fiorilla (afiorilla@lowey.com) with any questions about the case.