Tsering v. Meta Platforms, Inc.
Summary
This January 12, 2026 N.D. Cal. order granted Meta's motion to dismiss plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim, while finding plaintiffs adequately pleaded Article III standing. All asserted claims were dismissed with leave to amend and the court set a deadline of February 9, 2026 to file a Third Amended Complaint.
Litigation Status
Procedural Posture
Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint alleging CDAFA, pen register, unjust enrichment, and invasion of privacy claims. Defendant Meta moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The court considered the motion, granted limited judicial notice of certain incorporated documents, found Article III standing, and dismissed the operative claims with leave to amend.
Reported Holding
The court granted defendant Meta's motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim, granted judicial notice as to certain documents (Meta blog post and named apps' privacy policies), found that plaintiffs adequately pleaded Article III standing, and dismissed the CDAFA, pen register (Cal. Penal Code § 638.51), invasion of privacy, and unjust enrichment claims with leave to amend.
What the Court Decided
Judge Rita F. Lin (N.D. Cal.) granted Meta's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint, granted limited judicial notice of specific documents incorporated by reference, concluded plaintiffs had Article III standing, and dismissed all asserted claims with leave to amend. The court set a deadline of February 9, 2026 for filing a Third Amended Complaint and prohibited adding new claims or parties without leave of court.
What the Court Did Not Decide
The court did not resolve the merits of the underlying factual allegations or determine whether Meta's alleged conduct ultimately violates the cited statutes on the merits; it did not make final determinations about damages, class certification, or the ultimate propriety of any amended pleading.
Significance
Generally viewed as defense-favorable. Characterizations of significance describe how the matter has generally been discussed in tracked public sources; individual holdings are often narrow, procedural, or fact-specific, and this page does not state or imply broader holdings than the sources support.
What This Page Does and Does Not Say
This page reports what our tracked public sources say about this matter — including, where identified, the procedural posture (for example, a ruling on a motion to dismiss is not a final merits decision). It does not report legal conclusions beyond those sources, does not predict outcomes, and does not constitute legal advice.
Technologies at Issue
- mobile SDKs
- geolocation tracking
- targeted advertising
Third parties named or identified in tracked sources: Meta Platforms, Inc., MobilityWare, Nextdoor.
Statutes Invoked
- California Penal Code § 502 (CDAFA)
Claims Asserted
- California Penal Code § 502 (CDAFA)
- California Penal Code § 638.51 (pen register)
- unjust enrichment
- invasion of privacy
What This Matter May Mean for Website Operators
Because this matter is pending, anything reported here is procedural — allegations and interim rulings, not final determinations.
Detection of a similar technology on a website is an informational risk indicator, not a legal conclusion, and nothing in this section is legal advice.
Related Intelligence
Sources
About This Page
Publisher: Inspection-Ready Institute, Inc. (DBA Crandall Consulting), an independent website compliance and risk consultancy. We are not a law firm and nothing on this page is legal advice.
How this content is produced: Facts are extracted from publicly available sources — court and government materials, recognized legal press, professional analysis, and industry reports — by our litigation intelligence engine, stored with full source provenance, and rendered from the database. Risk guidelines are computed by a deterministic formula, never by an AI model directly. See the full methodology.
Limitations: Counts labeled "Tracked" reflect matters identified in our source set and are not official court statistics. We report what courts decided and did not decide; we do not predict outcomes.
Corrections: If you believe anything on this page is inaccurate, contact us via the contact page and we will review the underlying sources promptly.
Is Your Website Creating Hidden Tracking Risk?
Scan your site for third-party tracking and potential wiretap exposure. Free, no account required.
Scan My Website