In re Doubleclick Privacy Litig. - 154 F. Supp. 2d 497 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)

Rule:

In considering a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) (6), the court accepts as true all material factual allegations in the amended complaint, and may grant the motion only where it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief. General, conclusory allegations need not be credited, however, when they are belied by more specific allegations of the complaint.

Facts:

Plaintiffs, web users, alleged that defendant's, DoubleClick, Inc., cookies collected information about them, such as names, e-mail addresses, home and business addresses, telephone numbers, searches performed on the internet, and web pages or sites visited on the internet, which plaintiffs considered personal in nature and that users would not ordinarily expect advertisers to be able to collect. Defendant, a corporate provider of internet advertising products and services on the internet, collected potentially personally-identifiable information to build demographic profiles of users in order to target banner advertisements. Defendant moved to dismiss plaintiffs' federal law claims for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiffs' class action complaint alleged claims under 3 federal laws and four claims under state laws. Plaintiffs sought injunctive and monetary relief for injuries allegedly suffered as a result of the collection of information about them by defendant's cookies on the internet. Now pending was defendant’s motion, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), to dismiss Claims I, II and III of the Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. 

Issue:

Should the defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s federal claims be granted?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court granted defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiffs' federal claims, declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiffs' state law claims, and dismissed with prejudice plaintiffs' amended complaint. The court found that plaintiffs' amended complaint failed to plead violations of any of the three federal statutes under which plaintiffs sued. The court found inter alia that plaintiffs adequately plead that defendant's conduct constituted an offense under 18 U.S.C.S. § 2701(a), absent the exception under 18 U.S.C.S. § 2701(c)(2), but that because defendant's affiliated web sites were users of internet access under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), and the submissions containing personal data made by users to defendant's affiliated web sites were all intended for those web sites, the web sites' authorization was sufficient to except defendant's access under 18 U.S.C.S. § 2701(c)(2).