Facts

Following the 2015 San Bernardino terrorist attack executed by Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik in which they killed 14 people and injured 22, Gregory Clayborn and Hanan Megalla each respectively filed a lawsuit against Twitter Inc., Google LLC, and Facebook Inc. The Megalla plaintiffs were individuals injured in the attack, and the Clayborn plaintiffs were surviving family members of those who died in the attack. The cases were combined for briefing and eventual dismissal..

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs claimed that the defendants should be directly and secondarily liable for the terrorist attack under the American Terrorist Act. Plaintiffs contended that defendants failed to prevent foreign terrorist organizations and specially designated global terrorist groups from using their social media platforms. Plaintiffs alleged that the use of social media and the internet by terrorists has played an essential role in the rise of ISIS. Additionally, plaintiffs contended that defendants' social media sites provided material support, resources, and services to ISIS, which in turn permitted individuals, such as Farook and Malik, to become radicalized, and engage in violent acts of terrorism after being inspired by material on the internet. Plaintiffs asserted direct and secondary liability claims under the ATA and state law claims for negligent infliction of emotional distress, and, in the Clayborn case, a claim for wrongful death.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied the contentions and claimed plaintiffs could not show proximate cause. Defendants denied the contentions and moved to dismiss the combined actions after plaintiffs in the Clayborn case amended their complaint in response to an initial motion to dismiss and the court combined the cases.

Result

The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss with prejudice. The court first held that plaintiffs' direct liability ATA claims were too attenuated to meet the proximate cause requirement of the ATA, as interpreted in Fields v. Twitter, Inc., 881 F.3d 739 (9th Cir. 2018). The court rejected plaintiff's argument that recent amendments to the ATA modified the requirements for direct liability. The court also rejected the secondary liability claims, finding that there were no plausible allegations that defendants aided and abetted either Farook or Malik in the San Bernadino attack, and that plaintiffs' theory that these individuals were radicalized via the internet was insufficient for secondary liability under the ATA. The court also dismissed the plaintiffs' state law claims with prejudice for lack of causation.

Other Information

The court noted that other courts have "consistently rejected materially similar claims" and accordingly dismissed all the claims with prejudice. On Jan. 7, 2019, plaintiffs for the Clayborn case filed a notice of appeal.