According to a submission filed late last week, plaintiffs in the personal information misappropriation case have asked the trial court to take another look at whether they sufficiently alleged standing. The motion asserts that the Supreme Court’s TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez decision, issued 10 days after the plaintiffs’ case was dismissed with prejudice, constitutes an “intervening change in controlling law.”
In their complaint, the plaintiffs alleged that the Ancestry.com defendants operate a network of genealogical and historical record websites and sued them for misappropriating personal information without consent and using it for advertising and other promotional purposes. In its June opinion, the Northern District of California court overseeing the case found that the plaintiffs failed to show that the usage caused harm to those searchable on the defendants’ websites.
You can read a lot more details of this case in an article by Christina Tabacco published in the Law Street Media web site at: https://lawstreetmedia.com/tech/post-appeal-motion-for-indicative-ruling-filed-in-ancestry-com-right-to-publicity-case/.