13 Cited authorities

Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife
504 U.S. 555 (1992) Cited 27,829 times 138 Legal Analyses
Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"
Warth v. Seldin
422 U.S. 490 (1975) Cited 11,861 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"
Gladstone, Realtors v. Village of Bellwood
441 U.S. 91 (1979) Cited 1,514 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that a municipality suffered an injury from a reduction in its property tax base, even though nothing required the municipality to impose property taxes
Cohen v. JP Morgan Chase & Co.
498 F.3d 111 (2d Cir. 2007) Cited 231 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding that HUD's Statement of Policy was entitled to Chevron deference as to undivided unearned fees
Kendall v. Employees Retirement Plan of Avon Products
561 F.3d 112 (2d Cir. 2009) Cited 134 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a "plan participant suing under ERISA must establish both statutory standing and constitutional standing, meaning the plan participant must . . . assert a constitutionally sufficient injury arising from the breach of a statutorily imposed duty"
Donoghue v. Bulldog Investors Gen. P'ship
696 F.3d 170 (2d Cir. 2012) Cited 77 times 3 Legal Analyses
Explaining that § 16(b) is a procedural device to enforce the issuer’s rights
Ellis v. Cartoon Network, Inc.
CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. 1:14-CV-484-TWT (N.D. Ga. Oct. 8, 2014) Cited 11 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that while, “[t]he Android ID is a randomly generated number that is unique to each user and device [i]t is not, however, akin to a name. Without more, an Android ID does not identify a specific person . . . is not personally identifiable information.”
In re Nickelodeon Consumer Privacy Litig.
Civil Action No. 13-03731 (D.N.J. Jul. 2, 2014) Cited 11 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding that because an allegation is "entirely conclusory," it is "properly disregarded on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim."
In re Hulu Privacy Litigation
No. C 11-03764 LB (N.D. Cal. Apr. 28, 2014) Cited 8 times 5 Legal Analyses
Defining PII as, in part, “information that identifies a specific person and ties that person to particular videos that the person watched”
Organizacion JD Ltda. v. United States Department of Justice
124 F.3d 354 (2d Cir. 1997) Cited 4 times
Nos. 705, 96-6145. Argued: December 20, 1996. Decided: August 26, 1997. ISIDORO RODRIGUEZ, Barranquilla, Colombia, for plaintiffs-appellants. ARTHUR P. HUI, Assistant United States Attorney, Eastern District of New York (Zachary W. Carter, United States Attorney, Varuni Nelson, Jennifer C. Boal, Assistant United States Attorneys, Eastern District of New York, of counsel), for defendants-appellees. Appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Jack
Section 2701 - Unlawful access to stored communications
18 U.S.C. § 2701 Cited 1,323 times 135 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any person who "intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided ... and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage"
Section 2702 - Voluntary disclosure of customer communications or records
18 U.S.C. § 2702 Cited 344 times 24 Legal Analyses
Restricting use of Internet subscriber information without consent
Section 2710 - Wrongful disclosure of video tape rental or sale records
18 U.S.C. § 2710 Cited 207 times 72 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting disclosure of "personally identifiable information concerning" consumer of video rental establishment without consent

Austin-Spearman v. AMC Network Entertainment LLC et al

13 Cited authorities

Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"

Holding that a municipality suffered an injury from a reduction in its property tax base, even though nothing required the municipality to impose property taxes

Finding that HUD's Statement of Policy was entitled to Chevron deference as to undivided unearned fees

Holding that a "plan participant suing under ERISA must establish both statutory standing and constitutional standing, meaning the plan participant must . . . assert a constitutionally sufficient injury arising from the breach of a statutorily imposed duty"

Explaining that § 16(b) is a procedural device to enforce the issuer’s rights

Holding that while, “[t]he Android ID is a randomly generated number that is unique to each user and device [i]t is not, however, akin to a name. Without more, an Android ID does not identify a specific person . . . is not personally identifiable information.”

Finding that because an allegation is "entirely conclusory," it is "properly disregarded on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim."

Defining PII as, in part, “information that identifies a specific person and ties that person to particular videos that the person watched”

Holding liable any person who "intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided ... and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage"

Restricting use of Internet subscriber information without consent

Prohibiting disclosure of "personally identifiable information concerning" consumer of video rental establishment without consent