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.

Torts
Invasion of Privacy
Wiretapping

Vicente Pena, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Gamestop Inc.

Published: Nov. 17, 2023 | Result Date: Apr. 27, 2023 | Filing Date: Oct. 21, 2022 |

Case number: 3:22-cv-01635-JLS-KSC Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Judge

Janis L. Sammartino

Court

USDC Southern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

John J. Nelson
(Milberg, Coleman, Bryson, Phillips & Grossman)

Daniel G. Shay
(Law Office of Daniel G. Shay)

Joshua B. Swigart
(Swigart Law Group)


Defendant

Jui-Ting Anna Hsia
(ZwillGen Law LLP)


Facts

Gamestop Inc. has a web chat feature on its website that allows customers to ask questions or help with the site, products, or orders. On October 21, 2022, Vincent Pena filed a class action suit against Gamestop asserting claims for violations of the Federal Wiretap Act, and the California Invasion of Privacy Act.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that defendant, through its website's chat feature, secretly monitors, records, and creates transcripts of all communications without the customers' knowledge. Moreover, according to plaintiff, these transcripts are shared with a third party, Zendesk, that boasts its ability to obtain personal data from chat transcripts for sales and marketing purposes.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant argued that the case should be dismissed because, pursuant to the "party exception," it was exempt from liability under both statutes--that defendant was the party that was meant to, and did receive plaintiff's communications.

Result

Defendant's motion to dismiss was granted and case dismissed after plaintiff failed to amend complaint within allotted time.


#141870

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

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