This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Antitrust
Sherman Antitrust Act
Monopolization

Reveal Chat Holdco LLC, USA Technology and Management Services Inc. dba Lenddo USA, Cir.CL Inc., Beehive Biometric Inc. v. Facebook Inc.

Published: May 14, 2021 | Result Date: Apr. 26, 2021 | Filing Date: Jan. 16, 2020 |

Case number: 5:20-cv-00363-BLF Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Judge

Beth L. Freeman

Court

USDC Northern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Yavar Bathaee
(Bathaee Dunne LLP)

Edward M. Grauman
(Bathaee Dunne LLP)

Andrew C. Wolinsky
(Bathaee Dunne LLP)

Brian J. Dunne
(Bathaee Dunne LLP)

Christopher M. Burke
(Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP)

David H. Goldberger
(Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP)

Yifan Lv
(Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP)

David R. Scott
(Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP)

Kristen M. Anderson
(Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP)

Patrick J. McGahan
(Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP)

Michael P. Srodoski
(Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP)


Defendant

Sonal N. Mehta
(WilmerHale LLP)

David Z. Gringer
(WilmerHale LLP)

Ari Holtzblatt
(Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale & Dorr LLP)

Molly M. Jennings
(Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP)


Facts

In 2015, Facebook removed access to application programming interfaces (APIs) that plaintiffs Reveal Chat Holdco LLC, USA Technology and Management Services, Inc., and Beehive Biometric, Inc. relied on for their mobile applications. On January 16, 2020, plaintiffs filed a class action suit against Facebook in federal court, seeking damages and injunctive relief. On July 8, 2020 the district court granted Facebook's motion to dismiss and granted leave to plaintiffs to amend, finding that Plaintiffs' claims were time-barred by a four-year statute of limitations for antitrust claims and that Plaintiffs did not adequately plead fraudulent concealment. Thereafter, Facebook again filed a motion to dismiss regarding the statute of limitations.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs claim that Facebook removed the APIs in order to get rid of applications that were competitive with Facebook, violating Section 2 of the Sherman Act, and affirmatively lied about it. Plaintiffs also allege that they did not and could not learn the true reasons for Facebook's removal of the APIs until November 6, 2019, when Facebook's internal documents were publicly released, and that Facebook's conduct restarted the statute of limitations under the continuing violation doctrine.

DEFENDANT CONTENTIONS: Facebook claims that plaintiffs' claims were time-barred by the statute of limitations, any of its actions after 2015 did not restart the statute of limitations nor cause plaintiffs additional injury, Facebook did not mislead plaintiffs and they knew of their injuries in April 2015, and plaintiffs were not diligent after learning of their injuries.

Result

The court granted Facebook's motion to dismiss with prejudice because a four year statute of limitations governs the case and plaintiffs did not adequately plead a tolling theory under the continuing violation or fraudulent concealment doctrines.


#137099

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390