{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca9-24-14-2025-08-26","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca9-24-14-2025-08-26)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-17","fingerprint":"ewai:us:e7344b","proof":"sha256:f6c234c7d77bcf6a4523ddbd4a439d4b63383c2a95ddbf89ac41b9d5ba29966f","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"us:ca9-24-14-2025-08-26","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"Front matter","paragraphs":["para_1","para_2","para_3","para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19","para_20","para_21","para_22","para_23","para_24","para_25","para_26","para_27"],"kind":"front_matter"},{"title":"SUMMARY**","paragraphs":["para_28","para_29","para_30","para_31","para_32","para_33","para_34","para_35","para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39","para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43","para_44","para_45","para_46","para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61","para_62","para_63","para_64","para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69","para_70","para_71","para_72","para_73","para_74","para_75","para_76","para_77","para_78","para_79","para_80","para_81","para_82","para_83","para_84","para_85","para_86","para_87","para_88","para_89","para_90","para_91","para_92","para_93","para_94","para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99","para_100","para_101","para_102","para_103","para_104","para_105","para_106","para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110","para_111","para_112","para_113","para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117","para_118","para_119","para_120","para_121","para_122","para_123","para_124","para_125","para_126","para_127","para_128","para_129","para_130","para_131","para_132","para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137","para_138","para_139","para_140","para_141","para_142","para_143","para_144","para_145","para_146","para_147","para_148","para_149","para_150","para_151","para_152","para_153","para_154","para_155","para_156","para_157","para_158","para_159","para_160","para_161","para_162","para_163","para_164","para_165","para_166","para_167","para_168","para_169","para_170","para_171","para_172","para_173","para_174","para_175","para_176","para_177","para_178","para_179","para_180","para_181","para_182","para_183","para_184","para_185","para_186","para_187","para_188","para_189","para_190","para_191","para_192","para_193","para_194","para_195","para_196","para_197","para_198","para_199","para_200","para_201","para_202","para_203","para_204","para_205","para_206","para_207","para_208","para_209","para_210","para_211","para_212","para_213","para_214","para_215","para_216","para_217","para_218","para_219","para_220","para_221","para_222","para_223","para_224","para_225","para_226","para_227","para_228","para_229","para_230","para_231","para_232","para_233","para_234","para_235","para_236","para_237","para_238","para_239","para_240","para_241","para_242","para_243","para_244","para_245","para_246","para_247","para_248","para_249","para_250","para_251","para_252","para_253","para_254","para_255","para_256","para_257","para_258","para_259","para_260","para_261","para_262","para_263","para_264","para_265","para_266","para_267","para_268","para_269","para_270","para_271","para_272","para_273","para_274","para_275","para_276","para_277","para_278","para_279","para_280","para_281","para_282","para_283","para_284","para_285","para_286","para_287","para_288","para_289","para_290","para_291","para_292","para_293","para_294","para_295","para_296","para_297","para_298","para_299","para_300","para_301","para_302","para_303","para_304","para_305","para_306","para_307","para_308","para_309","para_310","para_311","para_312","para_313","para_314","para_315","para_316","para_317","para_318","para_319","para_320","para_321","para_322","para_323","para_324","para_325","para_326","para_327","para_328","para_329","para_330","para_331","para_332","para_333","para_334","para_335","para_336","para_337","para_338","para_339","para_340","para_341","para_342","para_343","para_344","para_345","para_346","para_347","para_348","para_349","para_350","para_351","para_352","para_353","para_354","para_355","para_356","para_357","para_358","para_359","para_360","para_361","para_362","para_363","para_364","para_365","para_366","para_367","para_368","para_369","para_370","para_371","para_372","para_373","para_374","para_375","para_376","para_377","para_378","para_379","para_380","para_381","para_382","para_383","para_384","para_385","para_386","para_387","para_388","para_389","para_390","para_391","para_392","para_393","para_394","para_395","para_396","para_397","para_398","para_399","para_400","para_401","para_402","para_403","para_404","para_405","para_406","para_407","para_408","para_409","para_410","para_411","para_412","para_413","para_414","para_415","para_416","para_417","para_418","para_419","para_420","para_421","para_422","para_423","para_424","para_425","para_426","para_427","para_428","para_429","para_430","para_431","para_432","para_433","para_434","para_435","para_436","para_437","para_438","para_439","para_440","para_441","para_442","para_443","para_444","para_445","para_446","para_447","para_448","para_449","para_450","para_451","para_452","para_453","para_454","para_455","para_456","para_457","para_458","para_459","para_460","para_461","para_462","para_463","para_464","para_465","para_466","para_467","para_468","para_469","para_470","para_471","para_472","para_473","para_474","para_475","para_476","para_477","para_478","para_479","para_480","para_481","para_482","para_483","para_484","para_485","para_486","para_487","para_488","para_489","para_490","para_491","para_492","para_493","para_494","para_495","para_496","para_497","para_498","para_499","para_500","para_501","para_502","para_503","para_504","para_505","para_506","para_507","para_508","para_509","para_510","para_511","para_512","para_513","para_514","para_515","para_516","para_517","para_518","para_519","para_520","para_521","para_522","para_523","para_524","para_525","para_526","para_527","para_528","para_529","para_530","para_531","para_532","para_533","para_534","para_535","para_536","para_537","para_538","para_539","para_540","para_541","para_542","para_543","para_544","para_545","para_546","para_547","para_548","para_549","para_550","para_551","para_552","para_553","para_554","para_555","para_556","para_557","para_558","para_559","para_560","para_561","para_562","para_563","para_564","para_565","para_566","para_567","para_568","para_569","para_570","para_571","para_572","para_573","para_574","para_575","para_576","para_577","para_578","para_579","para_580","para_581","para_582","para_583","para_584","para_585","para_586","para_587","para_588","para_589","para_590","para_591","para_592","para_593","para_594","para_595","para_596","para_597","para_598","para_599","para_600","para_601","para_602","para_603","para_604","para_605","para_606","para_607","para_608","para_609","para_610","para_611","para_612","para_613","para_614","para_615","para_616","para_617","para_618","para_619","para_620","para_621","para_622","para_623","para_624","para_625","para_626","para_627","para_628","para_629","para_630","para_631","para_632","para_633","para_634","para_635","para_636","para_637","para_638","para_639","para_640","para_641","para_642","para_643","para_644","para_645","para_646","para_647","para_648","para_649","para_650","para_651","para_652","para_653","para_654","para_655","para_656","para_657","para_658","para_659","para_660"],"kind":"summary"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"FOR PUBLICATION","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"ASHLEY POPA, individually and on","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"behalf of all others similarly situated,","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"Plaintiff - Appellant,","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"v.","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"MICROSOFT CORPORATION,","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"Defendant - Appellee.","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"No. 24-14","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"D.C. No.","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"2:23-cv-00294-","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"JLR","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"OPINION","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"Appeal from the United States District Court","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"for the Western District of Washington","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"James L. Robart, District Judge, Presiding","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"Argued and Submitted January 16, 2025","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"Pasadena, California","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"Filed August 26, 2025","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"Before: JOHNNIE B. RAWLINSON and MILAN D.","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"SMITH, JR., Circuit Judges, and JED S. RAKOFF, District","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"Judge.*","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"Opinion by Judge Jed S. Rakoff","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"* The Honorable Jed S. Rakoff, United States District Judge for the","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"2 POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"SUMMARY**","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"Article III Standing","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"The panel affirmed the district court’s order dismissing","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"for lack of Article III standing Ashley Popa’s diversity","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"putative class action against Microsoft Corporation","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"concerning the use of session-replay technology.","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"Session-replay technology allows a business to capture","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"and reproduce customers’ interactions with its","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"website. Popa encountered session-replay technology","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"during a visit to http://petsupplies.com. The website’s","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"operator employed the session-replay technology known as","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"“Clarity,” which is owned and operated by Microsoft.","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"The panel held that Popa failed to allege a “concrete”","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"injury sufficient to support Article III standing. In","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"determining whether a plaintiff’s injury is concrete,","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413 (2021), requires","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"a court to assess whether an individual plaintiff has suffered","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"a harm that has traditionally been actionable in our nation’s","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"legal system. Popa pointed to the common-law privacy torts","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"of intrusion upon seclusion and public disclosure of private","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"facts, but both analogies faltered. Popa did not explain how","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"the tracking of her interactions with the website caused her","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"to experience any kind of harm remotely similar to the highly","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"offensive interferences or disclosures that were actionable at","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"common law.","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"** This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader.","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION 3","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"COUNSEL","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"Connor P. Hayes (argued), Jamisen A. Etzel, and Gary F.","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"Lynch, Lynch Carpenter LLP, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania;","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"Kim D. Stephens, Tousley Brain Stephens PLLC, Seattle,","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"Washington; for Plaintiff-Appellant.","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"Eric B. Wolff (argued), Nicola Menaldo, and Anna M.","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"Thompson, Perkins Coie LLP, Seattle, Washington; James","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"G. Snell, Perkins Coie LLP, Palo Alto, California; for","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"Defendant-Appellee.","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"Aileen McGrath and Zach Z. Tan, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"& Feld LLP, San Francisco, California; Deborah R. White","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"and Larissa M. Whittingham, Retail Litigation Center Inc.,","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"Washington, D.C.; for Amicus Curiae Retail Litigation","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"Center.","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"Jeremy J. Broggi, Megan L. Brown, and Joel S. Nolette,","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"Wiley Rein LLP, Washington, D.C.; Jonathan D. Urick and","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"Maria C. Monaghan, U.S. Chamber Litigation Center,","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"Washington, D.C.; Cory L. Andrews and John M. Masslon","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"II, Washington Legal Foundation, Washington, D.C.;","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"Christopher J. Marchese and Paul D. Taske, NetChoice LLC,","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"Washington, D.C.; Lartease M. Tiffith, Interactive","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"Advertising Bureau; for Amici Curiae The Chamber of","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"Commerce of the United States of America, Washington","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"Legal Foundation, NetChoice LLC, and The Interactive","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"Advertising Bureau.","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"4 POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"OPINION","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"RAKOFF, District Judge:","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"This case centers on the use of so-called “session-replay","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"technology.” In simple terms, session-replay technology","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"allows a business to capture and reproduce customers’","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"interactions with its website. More technically, the software","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"“embed[s] snippets of JavaScript computer code” on a","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"website, “which then deploys on each website visitor’s","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"internet browser for the purpose [of] intercepting and","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"recording the website visitor’s electronic communications","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"with the . . . website, including their mouse movements,","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"clicks, keystrokes . . . , URLs of web pages visited, and/or","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"other electronic communications in real-time.” The session-","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"replay provider then “use[s] those [w]ebsite","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"[c]ommunications to recreate website visitors’ entire visit","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"to” the website. A business utilizing this technology can then","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"access useful consumer data, including “detailed heatmaps","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"of a website that provide information about which elements","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"of a website have high user engagement, how far website","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"users scrolled on the website, and the total clicks within a","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"given area on the website.” In essence, session-replay","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"technology helps a business to determine which parts of its","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"website are effective with customers and which are not.","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"Plaintiff Ashley Popa encountered session-replay","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"technology during a visit to","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"https://www.petsuppliesplus.com. Defendant PSP Group","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"LLC (“PSP”)—the website’s operator—employed on its","paragraph_id":"para_108"},{"text":"website the session-replay technology known as “Clarity,”","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"which is owned and operated by co-defendant Microsoft","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"Corp. (“Microsoft”). According to the amended complaint,","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"“Clarity organizes the information it captures into over 30","paragraph_id":"para_112"},{"text":"POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION 5","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"different categories including: the date a user visited the","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"website, the device the user accessed the website on, the type","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"of browser the user accessed the website on, the operating","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"system of the device used to access the website, the country","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"where the user accessed the website from, a user’s mouse","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"movements, a user’s screen swipes, text inputted by the user","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"on the website, and how far down a webpage a user scrolls.”","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"Popa focuses her allegations on specific pieces of","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"information allegedly collected by Clarity. She states that","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"during visits to PSP’s website, she “brow[s]ed for pet","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"supplies” and “communicated with PSP’s website by using","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"her mouse to hover and click on certain products.” She","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"explains that “if a website user views a certain product","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"offered for sale, that information is captured by Microsoft","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"Clarity embedded on the website.” While Popa also alleges","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"that a user’s mailing address is captured when entered for","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"delivery information, the screenshot produced in the","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"complaint indicates that masking software—a function that","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"limits what information Clarity collects—omitted the street","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"number and zip code.1 She claims that “PSP and [s]ession","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"[r]eplay [p]roviders use those [w]ebsite [c]ommunications to","paragraph_id":"para_134"},{"text":"recreate website visitors’ entire visit to","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"https://www.petsuppliesplus.com,” in order to “create a","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"video replay of the user’s behavior on the website and","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"provide it to PSP for analysis.”","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"1 The complaint describes “three standard approaches when it comes to","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"masking sensitive information collected from a user’s interaction with a","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"website”: “strict (all text entered by a user is purportedly masked),","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"balanced (sensitive text entered into certain specifically pre-coded fields,","paragraph_id":"para_142"},{"text":"such as passwords, and credit card information, is masked), and relaxed","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"(no text entered by a user is masked).” Microsoft submitted a webpage—","paragraph_id":"para_144"},{"text":"which was cited as a link in the complaint—that indicates that Clarity’s","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"default setting is “balanced.”","paragraph_id":"para_146"},{"text":"6 POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"In September 2022, Popa filed a complaint, on behalf of","paragraph_id":"para_148"},{"text":"a proposed class of visitors to PSP’s website, in the United","paragraph_id":"para_149"},{"text":"States District Court for the Western District of","paragraph_id":"para_150"},{"text":"Pennsylvania. In February 2023, Popa filed an amended","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"complaint. The amended complaint, which is the operative","paragraph_id":"para_152"},{"text":"pleading, brings two claims against both PSP and Microsoft.","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"Popa’s first claim arises under Pennsylvania’s Wiretapping","paragraph_id":"para_154"},{"text":"and Electronic Surveillance Control Act (“WESCA”), which","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"grants a civil cause of action to an injured party against any","paragraph_id":"para_156"},{"text":"person who, among other prohibited conduct, acquires “the","paragraph_id":"para_157"},{"text":"contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication","paragraph_id":"para_158"},{"text":"through the use of any electronic, mechanical or other","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"device.” 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. §§ 5702, 5725. Popa also brings","paragraph_id":"para_160"},{"text":"claims for “Invasion of Privacy – Intrusion Upon Seclusion”","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"against both Microsoft and PSP.","paragraph_id":"para_162"},{"text":"Soon after Popa amended her complaint, the district","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"court granted Microsoft’s motion to transfer the case to the","paragraph_id":"para_164"},{"text":"Western District of Washington. Several months later, in","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"June 2023, both defendants moved to dismiss: PSP moved","paragraph_id":"para_166"},{"text":"to dismiss under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"Rules of Civil Procedure, while Microsoft moved only under","paragraph_id":"para_168"},{"text":"Rule 12(b)(6).","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"The district court concluded that “Popa has failed to","paragraph_id":"para_170"},{"text":"establish that she has Article III standing to pursue her","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"claims in federal court.” For that reason, the court granted","paragraph_id":"para_172"},{"text":"PSP’s motion to dismiss for “lack of subject jurisdiction,”","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"dismissed the action “without prejudice and with leave to","paragraph_id":"para_174"},{"text":"amend,” and denied Microsoft’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"dismiss “as moot.”2 To support its ruling, the district court","paragraph_id":"para_176"},{"text":"2 Because Article III standing is “jurisdictional and can neither be waived","paragraph_id":"para_177"},{"text":"by the parties nor ignored by the court,” the district court’s dismissal","paragraph_id":"para_178"},{"text":"applied to Popa’s claims against both defendants despite Microsoft’s","paragraph_id":"para_179"},{"text":"POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION 7","paragraph_id":"para_180"},{"text":"cited decisions of other courts that have generally dismissed","paragraph_id":"para_181"},{"text":"session-replay cases “where the plaintiffs failed to allege that","paragraph_id":"para_182"},{"text":"the defendants’ tracking of their website interactions","paragraph_id":"para_183"},{"text":"resulted in a concrete harm.” The court observed that the","paragraph_id":"para_184"},{"text":"information allegedly collected by defendants “reveals","paragraph_id":"para_185"},{"text":"nothing more than the products that interested . . . Popa and","paragraph_id":"para_186"},{"text":"thus is not the type of private information that the law has","paragraph_id":"para_187"},{"text":"historically protected.”","paragraph_id":"para_188"},{"text":"Rather than further amend her complaint, Popa appealed","paragraph_id":"para_189"},{"text":"the district court’s order. The parties timely submitted their","paragraph_id":"para_190"},{"text":"briefs, and the Retail Litigation Center, the Chamber of","paragraph_id":"para_191"},{"text":"Commerce, the Washington Legal Foundation, Netchoice,","paragraph_id":"para_192"},{"text":"LLC, and the Interactive Advertising Bureau submitted","paragraph_id":"para_193"},{"text":"briefs as amici curiae in support of defendants. On December","paragraph_id":"para_194"},{"text":"17, 2024, after PSP submitted a notice of a bankruptcy filing,","paragraph_id":"para_195"},{"text":"we stayed the appeal “as to PSP Group, LLC,” but confirmed","paragraph_id":"para_196"},{"text":"that “[o]ral argument will remain as scheduled for the","paragraph_id":"para_197"},{"text":"remaining Defendant-Appellee,” Microsoft. We held oral","paragraph_id":"para_198"},{"text":"argument on January 16, 2025. On August 5, 2025, Popa and","paragraph_id":"para_199"},{"text":"PSP filed a stipulation dismissing Popa’s appeal as against","paragraph_id":"para_200"},{"text":"PSP and expressly providing that Popa’s appeal as against","paragraph_id":"para_201"},{"text":"Microsoft remains unaffected. We thereafter dismissed PSP","paragraph_id":"para_202"},{"text":"as appellee.","paragraph_id":"para_203"},{"text":"We review de novo a district court’s dismissal for lack","paragraph_id":"para_204"},{"text":"of standing under Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil","paragraph_id":"para_205"},{"text":"Procedure. Bowen v. Energizer Holdings, Inc., 118 F.4th","paragraph_id":"para_206"},{"text":"1134, 1142 (9th Cir. 2024). “As the party invoking federal","paragraph_id":"para_207"},{"text":"jurisdiction, the plaintiff[] bear[s] the burden of","paragraph_id":"para_208"},{"text":"failure to raise the issue in its own motion to dismiss. Yakima Valley","paragraph_id":"para_209"},{"text":"Mem’l Hosp. v. Wash. State Dep’t of Health, 654 F.3d 919, 932 n.17 (9th","paragraph_id":"para_210"},{"text":"Cir. 2011).","paragraph_id":"para_211"},{"text":"8 POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION","paragraph_id":"para_212"},{"text":"demonstrating that [she] ha[s] standing.” TransUnion LLC","paragraph_id":"para_213"},{"text":"v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413, 430–31 (2021).","paragraph_id":"para_214"},{"text":"This appeal turns on a single issue: whether Popa has","paragraph_id":"para_215"},{"text":"alleged a “concrete” injury sufficient to support Article III","paragraph_id":"para_216"},{"text":"standing. The doctrine of standing is grounded in Article III","paragraph_id":"para_217"},{"text":"of the Constitution, which limits the federal judicial power","paragraph_id":"para_218"},{"text":"to “Cases” and “Controversies.” U.S. Const. art. III, § 2.","paragraph_id":"para_219"},{"text":"“The doctrine developed . . . to ensure that federal courts do","paragraph_id":"para_220"},{"text":"not exceed their authority as it has been traditionally","paragraph_id":"para_221"},{"text":"understood,” by “limit[ing] the category of litigants","paragraph_id":"para_222"},{"text":"empowered to maintain a lawsuit in federal court to seek","paragraph_id":"para_223"},{"text":"redress for a legal wrong.” Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S.","paragraph_id":"para_224"},{"text":"330, 338 (2016) (citation omitted). Thus, “[f]or there to be a","paragraph_id":"para_225"},{"text":"case or controversy under Article III, the plaintiff must have","paragraph_id":"para_226"},{"text":"a ‘personal stake’ in the case—in other words, standing.”","paragraph_id":"para_227"},{"text":"TransUnion, 594 U.S. at 423 (internal quotation marks and","paragraph_id":"para_228"},{"text":"citation omitted).","paragraph_id":"para_229"},{"text":"Over time, the Supreme Court has identified three","paragraph_id":"para_230"},{"text":"elements to ensure that a plaintiff has the required “personal","paragraph_id":"para_231"},{"text":"stake”: (1) the plaintiff must have suffered an “injury in fact”","paragraph_id":"para_232"},{"text":"that is both “concrete and particularized” and “actual or","paragraph_id":"para_233"},{"text":"imminent”; (2) “there must be a causal connection between","paragraph_id":"para_234"},{"text":"the injury and the conduct complained of” (often described","paragraph_id":"para_235"},{"text":"as whether the injury is “fairly traceable” to the challenged","paragraph_id":"para_236"},{"text":"conduct); and (3) “it must be likely, as opposed to merely","paragraph_id":"para_237"},{"text":"speculative, that the injury will be redressed by a favorable","paragraph_id":"para_238"},{"text":"decision.” Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560–61","paragraph_id":"para_239"},{"text":"(1992) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).","paragraph_id":"para_240"},{"text":"This case concerns the first element, and particularly the","paragraph_id":"para_241"},{"text":"requirement that a plaintiff’s injury be “concrete.” A","paragraph_id":"para_242"},{"text":"“concrete” injury “must actually exist”; put differently, it","paragraph_id":"para_243"},{"text":"POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION 9","paragraph_id":"para_244"},{"text":"must be “real, and not abstract.” Spokeo, 578 U.S. at 340","paragraph_id":"para_245"},{"text":"(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).","paragraph_id":"para_246"},{"text":"The Supreme Court has, in recent years, made this","paragraph_id":"para_247"},{"text":"requirement even more definite. For example, in Spokeo, the","paragraph_id":"para_248"},{"text":"plaintiff sued a website under the Fair Credit Reporting Act","paragraph_id":"para_249"},{"text":"of 1970 (“FCRA”) for generating a profile that contained","paragraph_id":"para_250"},{"text":"inaccurate personal information. Id. at 335–36. In the","paragraph_id":"para_251"},{"text":"opinion below, our court had concluded that the plaintiff","paragraph_id":"para_252"},{"text":"satisfied the injury-in-fact element of standing by alleging","paragraph_id":"para_253"},{"text":"that “[the defendant had] violated [the plaintiff’s] statutory","paragraph_id":"para_254"},{"text":"rights, not just the statutory rights of other people.” Id. at 337","paragraph_id":"para_255"},{"text":"(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The","paragraph_id":"para_256"},{"text":"Supreme Court, however, clarified that our observations","paragraph_id":"para_257"},{"text":"concerned whether the injury was particularized, but not","paragraph_id":"para_258"},{"text":"whether it was concrete. Id. at 339–40. In drawing this","paragraph_id":"para_259"},{"text":"distinction, the Court outlined the central characteristics of","paragraph_id":"para_260"},{"text":"concreteness: “A ‘concrete’ injury must be ‘de facto’; that","paragraph_id":"para_261"},{"text":"is, it must actually exist.” Id. at 340 (citation omitted).","paragraph_id":"para_262"},{"text":"Further, to determine “whether an intangible harm","paragraph_id":"para_263"},{"text":"constitutes injury in fact,” the Court stated, “both history and","paragraph_id":"para_264"},{"text":"the judgment of Congress play important roles.” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_265"},{"text":"(emphasis added). But the Court cautioned that “Congress’","paragraph_id":"para_266"},{"text":"role in identifying and elevating intangible harms does not","paragraph_id":"para_267"},{"text":"mean that a plaintiff automatically satisfies the injury-in-fact","paragraph_id":"para_268"},{"text":"requirement whenever a statute grants a person a statutory","paragraph_id":"para_269"},{"text":"right and purports to authorize that person to sue to vindicate","paragraph_id":"para_270"},{"text":"that right.” Id. at 341. In other words, “Article III standing","paragraph_id":"para_271"},{"text":"requires a concrete injury even in the context of a statutory","paragraph_id":"para_272"},{"text":"violation.” Id. The Court ultimately remanded the case so","paragraph_id":"para_273"},{"text":"that we could determine “whether the particular procedural","paragraph_id":"para_274"},{"text":"violations alleged . . . entail a degree of risk sufficient to meet","paragraph_id":"para_275"},{"text":"the concreteness requirement.” Id. at 342–43.","paragraph_id":"para_276"},{"text":"10 POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION","paragraph_id":"para_277"},{"text":"Around five years later, the Court again addressed","paragraph_id":"para_278"},{"text":"concreteness in TransUnion, another appeal from our court.","paragraph_id":"para_279"},{"text":"In that case, we had given standing to an entire class of","paragraph_id":"para_280"},{"text":"plaintiffs, suing under the FCRA, who alleged that defendant","paragraph_id":"para_281"},{"text":"TransUnion included a notice on their credit reports that","paragraph_id":"para_282"},{"text":"misleadingly indicated that they were a “potential match” to","paragraph_id":"para_283"},{"text":"a “specially designated national” (e.g., terrorists, drug","paragraph_id":"para_284"},{"text":"traffickers, and other serious criminals) on a list maintained","paragraph_id":"para_285"},{"text":"by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets","paragraph_id":"para_286"},{"text":"Control (“OFAC”). TransUnion, 594 U.S. at 419–22.","paragraph_id":"para_287"},{"text":"However, because only a fraction of the class had their","paragraph_id":"para_288"},{"text":"misleading credit reports disclosed to third-party businesses","paragraph_id":"para_289"},{"text":"during the relevant time period, the Supreme Court reversed","paragraph_id":"para_290"},{"text":"our decision below, holding that only this limited group had","paragraph_id":"para_291"},{"text":"standing.3 Id. at 417–18. The Court’s analysis identified","paragraph_id":"para_292"},{"text":"history as the touchstone for concreteness. Specifically, it","paragraph_id":"para_293"},{"text":"explained that the “Court’s opinion in Spokeo . . . indicated","paragraph_id":"para_294"},{"text":"that courts should assess whether the alleged injury to the","paragraph_id":"para_295"},{"text":"plaintiff has a ‘close relationship’ to a harm ‘traditionally’","paragraph_id":"para_296"},{"text":"recognized as providing a basis for a lawsuit in American","paragraph_id":"para_297"},{"text":"courts.” Id. at 424 (citation omitted). “That inquiry asks","paragraph_id":"para_298"},{"text":"whether plaintiffs have identified a close historical or","paragraph_id":"para_299"},{"text":"common-law analogue for their asserted injury.” Id. And","paragraph_id":"para_300"},{"text":"while the Court acknowledged that “Spokeo does not require","paragraph_id":"para_301"},{"text":"an exact duplicate in American history and tradition,” it","paragraph_id":"para_302"},{"text":"cautioned that “Spokeo is not an open-ended invitation for","paragraph_id":"para_303"},{"text":"federal courts to loosen Article III based on contemporary,","paragraph_id":"para_304"},{"text":"3 The Supreme Court also concluded that there was “no reason or basis","paragraph_id":"para_305"},{"text":"to disturb the lower courts’ conclusion on [the named plaintiff’s]","paragraph_id":"para_306"},{"text":"individual standing as to” two claims related to alleged formatting","paragraph_id":"para_307"},{"text":"defects in certain mailings sent by the defendant. TransUnion, 594 U.S.","paragraph_id":"para_308"},{"text":"at 439–40 & n.8.","paragraph_id":"para_309"},{"text":"POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION 11","paragraph_id":"para_310"},{"text":"evolving beliefs about what kinds of suits should be heard in","paragraph_id":"para_311"},{"text":"federal courts.” Id. at 424–25.","paragraph_id":"para_312"},{"text":"The Court in TransUnion also addressed the limits on","paragraph_id":"para_313"},{"text":"Congress’s power to confer standing. According to the","paragraph_id":"para_314"},{"text":"Court, Congress’s perspective may be “instructive,” and it","paragraph_id":"para_315"},{"text":"may “elevate to the status of legally cognizable injuries","paragraph_id":"para_316"},{"text":"concrete, de facto injuries that were previously inadequate in","paragraph_id":"para_317"},{"text":"law.” Id. at 425 (internal quotation marks and citation","paragraph_id":"para_318"},{"text":"omitted). “But even though Congress may elevate harms that","paragraph_id":"para_319"},{"text":"exist in the real world before Congress recognized them to","paragraph_id":"para_320"},{"text":"actionable legal status, it may not simply enact an injury into","paragraph_id":"para_321"},{"text":"existence, using its lawmaking power to transform","paragraph_id":"para_322"},{"text":"something that is not remotely harmful into something that","paragraph_id":"para_323"},{"text":"is.” Id. at 426 (internal quotation marks and citation","paragraph_id":"para_324"},{"text":"omitted). The Court thus distinguished between “(i) a","paragraph_id":"para_325"},{"text":"plaintiff’s statutory cause of action to sue a defendant over","paragraph_id":"para_326"},{"text":"the defendant’s violation of federal law, and (ii) a plaintiff’s","paragraph_id":"para_327"},{"text":"suffering concrete harm because of the defendant’s violation","paragraph_id":"para_328"},{"text":"of federal law.” Id. at 426–27. The Court summarized:","paragraph_id":"para_329"},{"text":"“[U]nder Article III, an injury in law is not an injury in fact.”","paragraph_id":"para_330"},{"text":"Id. at 427.","paragraph_id":"para_331"},{"text":"The Court’s analysis of the plaintiffs’ claims in","paragraph_id":"para_332"},{"text":"TransUnion also concentrated on the match between the","paragraph_id":"para_333"},{"text":"injury that they allegedly experienced and the kinds of harms","paragraph_id":"para_334"},{"text":"that were actionable at common law. In particular, the Court","paragraph_id":"para_335"},{"text":"considered whether the plaintiffs had experienced harm","paragraph_id":"para_336"},{"text":"similar to “the reputational harm associated with the tort of","paragraph_id":"para_337"},{"text":"defamation.” Id. at 432. On the one hand, the Court rejected","paragraph_id":"para_338"},{"text":"the defendant’s argument that the plaintiffs had not","paragraph_id":"para_339"},{"text":"experienced a defamation-like harm because the statement","paragraph_id":"para_340"},{"text":"that the plaintiffs were “potential terrorists” was only","paragraph_id":"para_341"},{"text":"misleading and not literally false. Id. at 433 (emphasis","paragraph_id":"para_342"},{"text":"added). Emphasizing that the analysis does not require “an","paragraph_id":"para_343"},{"text":"12 POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION","paragraph_id":"para_344"},{"text":"exact duplicate,” the Court explained that “the harm from a","paragraph_id":"para_345"},{"text":"misleading statement of this kind bears a sufficiently close","paragraph_id":"para_346"},{"text":"relationship to the harm from a false and defamatory","paragraph_id":"para_347"},{"text":"statement.” Id. The absence of dissemination, on the other","paragraph_id":"para_348"},{"text":"hand, was fatal to the claims of those plaintiffs whose","paragraph_id":"para_349"},{"text":"misleading credit reports had not been shared with a third","paragraph_id":"para_350"},{"text":"party. The Court reasoned that “there is no historical or","paragraph_id":"para_351"},{"text":"common-law analog where the mere existence of inaccurate","paragraph_id":"para_352"},{"text":"information, absent dissemination, amounts to concrete","paragraph_id":"para_353"},{"text":"injury.” Id. at 434 (internal quotation marks and citation","paragraph_id":"para_354"},{"text":"omitted). In other words, “[t]he mere presence of an","paragraph_id":"para_355"},{"text":"inaccuracy in an internal credit file, if it is not disclosed to a","paragraph_id":"para_356"},{"text":"third party, causes no concrete harm.” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_357"},{"text":"Our sister circuits have diverged, at least in part, in their","paragraph_id":"para_358"},{"text":"interpretation of Spokeo and TransUnion, developing","paragraph_id":"para_359"},{"text":"different tests for determining whether a plaintiff’s injury is","paragraph_id":"para_360"},{"text":"concrete. Some circuits have considered whether a plaintiff’s","paragraph_id":"para_361"},{"text":"harm satisfies each element required to state a common-law","paragraph_id":"para_362"},{"text":"cause of action. See, e.g., Hunstein v. Preferred Collection","paragraph_id":"para_363"},{"text":"& Mgmt. Servs., Inc., 48 F.4th 1236, 1241, 1245–46 (11th","paragraph_id":"para_364"},{"text":"Cir. 2022) (en banc) (finding no concrete injury because the","paragraph_id":"para_365"},{"text":"plaintiff’s harm from an alleged statutory violation did not","paragraph_id":"para_366"},{"text":"satisfy the element of “[p]ublicity” for a public-disclosure-","paragraph_id":"para_367"},{"text":"of-private-facts claim). Others have adopted a less rigid","paragraph_id":"para_368"},{"text":"approach that focuses on whether the harm experienced by a","paragraph_id":"para_369"},{"text":"plaintiff is similar in kind to a harm protected by one of the","paragraph_id":"para_370"},{"text":"common-law privacy torts. See, e.g., Barclift v. Keystone","paragraph_id":"para_371"},{"text":"Credit Servs., LLC, 93 F.4th 136, 143–45 (3d Cir. 2024)","paragraph_id":"para_372"},{"text":"(distinguishing between “an element-based approach” and a","paragraph_id":"para_373"},{"text":"“kind of harm” test, and concluding that “when asking","paragraph_id":"para_374"},{"text":"whether a plaintiff’s intangible injury is ‘concrete,’ we will","paragraph_id":"para_375"},{"text":"examine the kind of harm at issue”); see also Baysal v.","paragraph_id":"para_376"},{"text":"Midvale Indem. Co., 78 F.4th 976, 979 (7th Cir. 2023)","paragraph_id":"para_377"},{"text":"POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION 13","paragraph_id":"para_378"},{"text":"(explaining that drivers’ license numbers did not constitute","paragraph_id":"para_379"},{"text":"“the sort of potentially embarrassing or intimate details”","paragraph_id":"para_380"},{"text":"covered by the common-law privacy torts). While the","paragraph_id":"para_381"},{"text":"precise formulation of the test has sparked some inter-circuit","paragraph_id":"para_382"},{"text":"division,4 these approaches all share an important feature:","paragraph_id":"para_383"},{"text":"they look to the specific underlying harm experienced by the","paragraph_id":"para_384"},{"text":"plaintiff and compare it, in detail, to a specific common-law","paragraph_id":"para_385"},{"text":"tort. At base—and all we need to acknowledge to decide this","paragraph_id":"para_386"},{"text":"case—is that TransUnion requires a court to assess whether","paragraph_id":"para_387"},{"text":"an individual plaintiff has suffered a harm that has","paragraph_id":"para_388"},{"text":"traditionally been actionable in our nation’s legal system.","paragraph_id":"para_389"},{"text":"Recognizing that TransUnion contemplates a standing","paragraph_id":"para_390"},{"text":"inquiry particularized to a plaintiff’s circumstances and","paragraph_id":"para_391"},{"text":"benchmarked to a specific tort, we conclude that Popa has","paragraph_id":"para_392"},{"text":"not met her burden to demonstrate that she has standing.","paragraph_id":"para_393"},{"text":"Popa briefly points to the common-law privacy torts of","paragraph_id":"para_394"},{"text":"intrusion upon seclusion and public disclosure of private","paragraph_id":"para_395"},{"text":"facts. Both analogies falter for the same reason. To show","paragraph_id":"para_396"},{"text":"intrusion upon seclusion, a plaintiff must show “an","paragraph_id":"para_397"},{"text":"intentional interference with his interest in solitude or","paragraph_id":"para_398"},{"text":"seclusion, either as to his person or as to his private affairs","paragraph_id":"para_399"},{"text":"or concerns, of a kind that would be highly offensive to a","paragraph_id":"para_400"},{"text":"reasonable man.” Nayab v. Cap. One Bank (USA), N.A., 942","paragraph_id":"para_401"},{"text":"F.3d 480, 491 (9th Cir. 2019) (emphasis added) (quoting","paragraph_id":"para_402"},{"text":"Restatement (Second) of Torts § 652B cmt. a (Am. Law Inst.","paragraph_id":"para_403"},{"text":"4 The Third Circuit has recognized that the “element-based approach”","paragraph_id":"para_404"},{"text":"and “kind of harm” test can overlap in practice. See Barclift v. Keystone","paragraph_id":"para_405"},{"text":"Credit Servs., LLC, 93 F.4th 136, 146 n.4 (3d Cir. 2024) (“We","paragraph_id":"para_406"},{"text":"acknowledge that there is overlap between the nature of the traditional","paragraph_id":"para_407"},{"text":"harm (humiliation stemming from the public disclosure of offensive","paragraph_id":"para_408"},{"text":"information) and an element of the traditional tort (publicity). This is","paragraph_id":"para_409"},{"text":"because a disclosure that remains nonpublic is unlikely to result in the","paragraph_id":"para_410"},{"text":"type of humiliation associated with the traditional injury.”).","paragraph_id":"para_411"},{"text":"14 POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION","paragraph_id":"para_412"},{"text":"1977)). Similarly, a claim for public disclosure of private","paragraph_id":"para_413"},{"text":"facts requires that a defendant “gives publicity” to a matter","paragraph_id":"para_414"},{"text":"that concerns “the private life of another,” that the","paragraph_id":"para_415"},{"text":"information is “highly offensive to a reasonable person,” and","paragraph_id":"para_416"},{"text":"that the information is not of legitimate public concern.","paragraph_id":"para_417"},{"text":"Restatement (Second) of Torts § 652D (emphasis added).","paragraph_id":"para_418"},{"text":"Popa does not explain how the tracking of her","paragraph_id":"para_419"},{"text":"interactions with the PSP website caused her to experience","paragraph_id":"para_420"},{"text":"any kind of harm that is remotely similar to the “highly","paragraph_id":"para_421"},{"text":"offensive” interferences or disclosures that were actionable","paragraph_id":"para_422"},{"text":"at common law. Of course, an “exact duplicate” is not","paragraph_id":"para_423"},{"text":"required, and many courts require a match only in the kind","paragraph_id":"para_424"},{"text":"of harm and not the degree. But Popa identifies no","paragraph_id":"para_425"},{"text":"embarrassing, invasive, or otherwise private information","paragraph_id":"para_426"},{"text":"collected by Clarity. Indeed, the monitoring of Popa’s","paragraph_id":"para_427"},{"text":"interactions with PSP’s website seems most similar to a store","paragraph_id":"para_428"},{"text":"clerk’s observing shoppers in order to identify aisles that are","paragraph_id":"para_429"},{"text":"particularly popular or to spot problems that disrupt potential","paragraph_id":"para_430"},{"text":"sales.","paragraph_id":"para_431"},{"text":"This is quite different from the hypotheticals set out in","paragraph_id":"para_432"},{"text":"the Restatement. Consider, for example, the following","paragraph_id":"para_433"},{"text":"scenario for intrusion upon seclusion: “A . . . rents a room in","paragraph_id":"para_434"},{"text":"a house adjoining B’s residence, and for two weeks looks","paragraph_id":"para_435"},{"text":"into the windows of B’s upstairs bedroom through a","paragraph_id":"para_436"},{"text":"telescope taking intimate pictures with a telescopic lens.”","paragraph_id":"para_437"},{"text":"Restatement (Second) of Torts § 652B cmt. b, illus. 2. Or, to","paragraph_id":"para_438"},{"text":"take an example for public disclosure of private facts: “A","paragraph_id":"para_439"},{"text":"publishes, without B’s consent, a picture of B nursing her","paragraph_id":"para_440"},{"text":"child.” Restatement (Second) of Torts § 652D cmt. c,","paragraph_id":"para_441"},{"text":"illus. 10. Microsoft’s conduct in this case does not implicate","paragraph_id":"para_442"},{"text":"a similarly sensitive sphere. At most, Popa alleges that","paragraph_id":"para_443"},{"text":"Clarity gathered her pet-store preferences and her street","paragraph_id":"para_444"},{"text":"name. To the extent Microsoft’s tracking software could be","paragraph_id":"para_445"},{"text":"POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION 15","paragraph_id":"para_446"},{"text":"offensive in particular circumstances (e.g., involving","paragraph_id":"para_447"},{"text":"sensitive medical or financial information), Popa does not","paragraph_id":"para_448"},{"text":"plausibly allege the infringement of any such privacy","paragraph_id":"para_449"},{"text":"interest.5","paragraph_id":"para_450"},{"text":"To avoid this conclusion, Popa contends that because the","paragraph_id":"para_451"},{"text":"Pennsylvania legislature enacted a statute protecting a","paragraph_id":"para_452"},{"text":"substantive privacy right, any plaintiff alleging a violation of","paragraph_id":"para_453"},{"text":"that statute will satisfy Article III. As an initial matter, that","paragraph_id":"para_454"},{"text":"analysis reverts to a pre-TransUnion (even pre-Spokeo)","paragraph_id":"para_455"},{"text":"approach that favors a legislative body’s views in the","paragraph_id":"para_456"},{"text":"aggregate over a plaintiff’s individual circumstances. And","paragraph_id":"para_457"},{"text":"while that position has the support of a minority of justices","paragraph_id":"para_458"},{"text":"on the Supreme Court and some lower-court judges, see,","paragraph_id":"para_459"},{"text":"e.g., TransUnion, 594 U.S. at 442–60 (Thomas, J.,","paragraph_id":"para_460"},{"text":"dissenting); Baysal, 78 F.4th at 980–90 (Ripple, J.,","paragraph_id":"para_461"},{"text":"dissenting), TransUnion clearly cautions courts not to “treat","paragraph_id":"para_462"},{"text":"an injury as ‘concrete’ for Article III purposes based only on","paragraph_id":"para_463"},{"text":"Congress’s say-so,” TransUnion, 594 U.S. at 426 (internal","paragraph_id":"para_464"},{"text":"quotation marks and citation omitted); see also Spokeo, 578","paragraph_id":"para_465"},{"text":"U.S. at 341 (“Article III standing requires a concrete injury","paragraph_id":"para_466"},{"text":"even in the context of a statutory violation.”).","paragraph_id":"para_467"},{"text":"Moreover, Popa’s broad theory that the common law","paragraph_id":"para_468"},{"text":"protected privacy rights—pitched at a high level of","paragraph_id":"para_469"},{"text":"generality—does not align with the analysis adopted in","paragraph_id":"para_470"},{"text":"5 To be sure, the complaint identifies potential harms that might be","paragraph_id":"para_471"},{"text":"associated with session-replay technology, such as identity theft. But the","paragraph_id":"para_472"},{"text":"complaint includes no allegations plausibly linking these potential,","paragraph_id":"para_473"},{"text":"generalized harms to the operation of Clarity on PSP’s website vis-à-vis","paragraph_id":"para_474"},{"text":"Popa. Popa also mentions trespass as a potential common-law analog","paragraph_id":"para_475"},{"text":"twice in her opening brief, without any additional explanation. But she","paragraph_id":"para_476"},{"text":"never identifies what possessory interest Microsoft invaded. Indeed,","paragraph_id":"para_477"},{"text":"Clarity—at least according to the complaint—appears to operate on","paragraph_id":"para_478"},{"text":"PSP’s website rather than on an individual’s computer.","paragraph_id":"para_479"},{"text":"16 POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION","paragraph_id":"para_480"},{"text":"TransUnion. There, the Court considered carefully the key","paragraph_id":"para_481"},{"text":"elements that shape the harm proscribed by the common-law","paragraph_id":"para_482"},{"text":"tort of defamation (namely, falsity and publication), grouped","paragraph_id":"para_483"},{"text":"plaintiffs who alleged similar facts, and assessed whether the","paragraph_id":"para_484"},{"text":"specific plaintiffs had experienced harm of that nature. The","paragraph_id":"para_485"},{"text":"Court determined that some plaintiffs had standing to bring","paragraph_id":"para_486"},{"text":"a claim under the statute while others did not—an implicit","paragraph_id":"para_487"},{"text":"rejection of a one-size-fits-all approach. In addition, rather","paragraph_id":"para_488"},{"text":"than describe a general right to privacy, the Court in","paragraph_id":"para_489"},{"text":"TransUnion specifically cited “reputational harms,","paragraph_id":"para_490"},{"text":"disclosure of private information, and intrusion upon","paragraph_id":"para_491"},{"text":"seclusion” as examples of “harms traditionally recognized as","paragraph_id":"para_492"},{"text":"providing a basis for lawsuits in American courts.”","paragraph_id":"para_493"},{"text":"TransUnion, 594 U.S. at 425. Similarly, the Seventh Circuit","paragraph_id":"para_494"},{"text":"recently denied a generalized “invasion-of-privacy” theory,","paragraph_id":"para_495"},{"text":"explaining that “at common law an invasion of the right to","paragraph_id":"para_496"},{"text":"privacy has traditionally encompassed four distinct torts:","paragraph_id":"para_497"},{"text":"intrusion upon seclusion, appropriation of another person’s","paragraph_id":"para_498"},{"text":"name or likeness, publicity given to another person’s private","paragraph_id":"para_499"},{"text":"life, and publicity that places one in a false light.” Nabozny","paragraph_id":"para_500"},{"text":"v. Optio Sols. LLC, 84 F.4th 731, 735 (7th Cir. 2023)","paragraph_id":"para_501"},{"text":"(emphasis added). In short, there existed no free-roaming","paragraph_id":"para_502"},{"text":"privacy right at common law but rather four discrete torts","paragraph_id":"para_503"},{"text":"that protected specific kinds of privacy-related harms. And,","paragraph_id":"para_504"},{"text":"as explained supra, Popa has not identified a harm that she","paragraph_id":"para_505"},{"text":"experienced that is remotely similar to those protected by","paragraph_id":"para_506"},{"text":"these torts.","paragraph_id":"para_507"},{"text":"Popa next turns to caselaw in this circuit to support her","paragraph_id":"para_508"},{"text":"argument that a plaintiff necessarily enjoys Article III","paragraph_id":"para_509"},{"text":"standing when suing under a statute that protects a","paragraph_id":"para_510"},{"text":"substantive right to privacy. She relies on two pre-","paragraph_id":"para_511"},{"text":"TransUnion cases—Eichenberger v. ESPN, Inc., 876 F.3d","paragraph_id":"para_512"},{"text":"979 (9th Cir. 2017), and In re Facebook, Inc. Internet","paragraph_id":"para_513"},{"text":"POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION 17","paragraph_id":"para_514"},{"text":"Tracking Litigation, 956 F.3d 589 (9th Cir. 2020)—that she","paragraph_id":"para_515"},{"text":"claims “affirm the straightforward principle at the heart of","paragraph_id":"para_516"},{"text":"this appeal: the violation of a statute codifying a common-","paragraph_id":"para_517"},{"text":"law privacy harm is sufficient to confer Article III standing.”","paragraph_id":"para_518"},{"text":"In support of her position that TransUnion did not","paragraph_id":"para_519"},{"text":"undermine those cases, she emphasizes that Jones v. Ford","paragraph_id":"para_520"},{"text":"Motor Co., 85 F.4th 570 (9th Cir. 2023) (per curiam)—","paragraph_id":"para_521"},{"text":"decided after TransUnion—relied on Eichenberger and In re","paragraph_id":"para_522"},{"text":"Facebook. Based on this precedent, Popa insists that “a","paragraph_id":"para_523"},{"text":"violation of the WESCA is an intangible concrete harm.”","paragraph_id":"para_524"},{"text":"In Jones, this Court explained that “the relevant law is","paragraph_id":"para_525"},{"text":"settled”: “A statute that codifies a common law privacy right","paragraph_id":"para_526"},{"text":"‘gives rise to a concrete injury sufficient to confer","paragraph_id":"para_527"},{"text":"standing.’” Id. at 574 (quoting In re Facebook, 956 F.3d at","paragraph_id":"para_528"},{"text":"598). It added that “this court has consistently found that","paragraph_id":"para_529"},{"text":"‘[v]iolations of the right to privacy have long been","paragraph_id":"para_530"},{"text":"actionable at common law.’” Id. (alteration in original)","paragraph_id":"para_531"},{"text":"(quoting Eichenberger, 876 F.3d at 983). Importantly, Jones","paragraph_id":"para_532"},{"text":"was decided after TransUnion, and these excerpts could be","paragraph_id":"para_533"},{"text":"read, at least at first glance, to support Popa’s position that","paragraph_id":"para_534"},{"text":"broad privacy rights, enshrined in a statute, satisfy","paragraph_id":"para_535"},{"text":"concreteness as a matter of course.","paragraph_id":"para_536"},{"text":"But we decline to interpret Jones as establishing the","paragraph_id":"para_537"},{"text":"categorical rule that Popa would propose. First, the question","paragraph_id":"para_538"},{"text":"of concreteness under TransUnion was not clearly presented","paragraph_id":"para_539"},{"text":"in that case. Of course, we have an independent obligation","paragraph_id":"para_540"},{"text":"to assure ourselves of our jurisdiction, but our statements","paragraph_id":"para_541"},{"text":"touching on an issue that was not clearly presented are not","paragraph_id":"para_542"},{"text":"entitled to the same weight as carefully reasoned analysis of","paragraph_id":"para_543"},{"text":"the issue. Cf. Leeson v. Transamerica Disability Income","paragraph_id":"para_544"},{"text":"Plan, 671 F.3d 969, 979 (9th Cir. 2012) (“We have . . .","paragraph_id":"para_545"},{"text":"specifically noted that drive-by jurisdictional rulings lack","paragraph_id":"para_546"},{"text":"precedential force.”) (citations omitted).","paragraph_id":"para_547"},{"text":"18 POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION","paragraph_id":"para_548"},{"text":"Second, despite its generalization about privacy statutes,","paragraph_id":"para_549"},{"text":"Jones still implicitly evaluated, as TransUnion mandates,","paragraph_id":"para_550"},{"text":"whether the specific plaintiffs had suffered a concrete injury.","paragraph_id":"para_551"},{"text":"The complaint in Jones alleged that plaintiffs’ vehicles had","paragraph_id":"para_552"},{"text":"“download[ed] all text messages and call logs from","paragraph_id":"para_553"},{"text":"[p]laintiffs’ cellphones as soon as they [were] connected,”","paragraph_id":"para_554"},{"text":"and that “the infotainment system permanently store[d] the","paragraph_id":"para_555"},{"text":"private communications without [p]laintiffs’ knowledge or","paragraph_id":"para_556"},{"text":"consent.” Jones, 85 F.4th at 574. Although we did not","paragraph_id":"para_557"},{"text":"explicitly tie these allegations to the TransUnion framework","paragraph_id":"para_558"},{"text":"(and relied in part on our pre-TransUnion caselaw, described","paragraph_id":"para_559"},{"text":"infra), the attention to the specific circumstances of the","paragraph_id":"para_560"},{"text":"plaintiffs’ injuries in the course of our analysis suggests that","paragraph_id":"para_561"},{"text":"we considered whether the specific plaintiffs alleged a","paragraph_id":"para_562"},{"text":"violation of their “substantive privacy right[s].” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_563"},{"text":"Third, and finally, our decision in Phillips v. U.S.","paragraph_id":"para_564"},{"text":"Customs & Border Protection, 74 F.4th 986 (9th Cir.","paragraph_id":"para_565"},{"text":"2023)—issued several months before Jones—integrates the","paragraph_id":"para_566"},{"text":"kind of analysis contemplated by TransUnion. There,","paragraph_id":"para_567"},{"text":"“[p]laintiffs’ central argument [was] that the government’s","paragraph_id":"para_568"},{"text":"retention of illegally obtained information about them [was]","paragraph_id":"para_569"},{"text":"per se an injury-in-fact.” Id. at 991. We rejected this","paragraph_id":"para_570"},{"text":"argument, citing both Spokeo and TransUnion, and","paragraph_id":"para_571"},{"text":"explained that “[w]here we have held that the retention of","paragraph_id":"para_572"},{"text":"illegally obtained records resulted in a concrete injury, we","paragraph_id":"para_573"},{"text":"have always identified something beyond retention alone","paragraph_id":"para_574"},{"text":"that resulted in an injury of the sort recognized by the","paragraph_id":"para_575"},{"text":"Supreme Court, such as a material risk of future tangible","paragraph_id":"para_576"},{"text":"harm, a violation of the common law right to privacy, or a","paragraph_id":"para_577"},{"text":"cognizable constitutional violation.” Id. at 993 (emphasis","paragraph_id":"para_578"},{"text":"added). We then evaluated the facts of several prior","paragraph_id":"para_579"},{"text":"decisions to support our general conclusion. Id. at 993–95.","paragraph_id":"para_580"},{"text":"Phillips approves of an approach, implicit in Jones and","paragraph_id":"para_581"},{"text":"POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION 19","paragraph_id":"para_582"},{"text":"consistent with TransUnion, that requires a plaintiff to","paragraph_id":"para_583"},{"text":"demonstrate more than just a statutory violation when","paragraph_id":"para_584"},{"text":"evaluating whether a plaintiff has alleged a concrete injury.","paragraph_id":"para_585"},{"text":"Popa also relies on two pre-TransUnion cases—","paragraph_id":"para_586"},{"text":"Eichenberger and In re Facebook—in support of her","paragraph_id":"para_587"},{"text":"position. In Eichenberger, the plaintiff alleged that the","paragraph_id":"para_588"},{"text":"defendant disclosed information about videos that the","paragraph_id":"para_589"},{"text":"plaintiff had watched on its application to a third party.","paragraph_id":"para_590"},{"text":"Eichenberger, 876 F.3d at 981–82. When evaluating","paragraph_id":"para_591"},{"text":"whether the plaintiff alleged a concrete injury, we explained","paragraph_id":"para_592"},{"text":"that “Spokeo concerned procedural violations of the FCRA","paragraph_id":"para_593"},{"text":"that would not invariably injure a concrete interest.” Id. at","paragraph_id":"para_594"},{"text":"982. We then contrasted that statute with the “provision at","paragraph_id":"para_595"},{"text":"issue here, [which] codifies a context-specific extension of","paragraph_id":"para_596"},{"text":"the substantive right to privacy.” Id. at 983. This distinction","paragraph_id":"para_597"},{"text":"justified our conclusion that “every disclosure of an","paragraph_id":"para_598"},{"text":"individual’s ‘personally identifiable information’ and video-","paragraph_id":"para_599"},{"text":"viewing history offends the interests that the statute","paragraph_id":"para_600"},{"text":"protects.” Id. In reaching this conclusion, we noted that","paragraph_id":"para_601"},{"text":"“[v]iolations of the right to privacy have long been","paragraph_id":"para_602"},{"text":"actionable at common law,” and that the right to privacy","paragraph_id":"para_603"},{"text":"“encompass[es] the individual’s control of information","paragraph_id":"para_604"},{"text":"concerning his or her person.” Id. (quoting U.S. Dep’t of","paragraph_id":"para_605"},{"text":"Just. v. Reps. Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749,","paragraph_id":"para_606"},{"text":"763 (1989)).","paragraph_id":"para_607"},{"text":"Several years later, In re Facebook relied on","paragraph_id":"para_608"},{"text":"Eichenberger’s interpretation of Spokeo. That case involved","paragraph_id":"para_609"},{"text":"a Facebook plug-in that “track[ed] users’ browsing histories","paragraph_id":"para_610"},{"text":"when they visit[ed] third-party websites, and then","paragraph_id":"para_611"},{"text":"compile[d] these browsing histories into personal profiles","paragraph_id":"para_612"},{"text":"which [were] sold to advertisers.” In re Facebook, 956 F.3d","paragraph_id":"para_613"},{"text":"at 596. We concluded that plaintiffs “had established","paragraph_id":"para_614"},{"text":"standing . . . because they adequately alleged privacy","paragraph_id":"para_615"},{"text":"20 POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION","paragraph_id":"para_616"},{"text":"harms.” Id. at 598. More specifically, we explained that","paragraph_id":"para_617"},{"text":"“[p]laintiffs have adequately alleged that Facebook’s","paragraph_id":"para_618"},{"text":"tracking and collection practices would cause harm or a","paragraph_id":"para_619"},{"text":"material risk of harm to their interest in controlling their","paragraph_id":"para_620"},{"text":"personal information.” Id. at 599. That conclusion followed","paragraph_id":"para_621"},{"text":"from our observation that “Facebook gained a cradle-to-","paragraph_id":"para_622"},{"text":"grave profile without users’ consent.” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_623"},{"text":"But even though our analysis in Eichenberger and In re","paragraph_id":"para_624"},{"text":"Facebook might have arguably offered at the time some","paragraph_id":"para_625"},{"text":"support for the position that Popa now advances, that","paragraph_id":"para_626"},{"text":"analysis finds no support in TransUnion. There, the Supreme","paragraph_id":"para_627"},{"text":"Court made no distinction between “procedural” and","paragraph_id":"para_628"},{"text":"“substantive” statutory provisions, instead holding, without","paragraph_id":"para_629"},{"text":"any limitation, that courts should assess whether “plaintiffs","paragraph_id":"para_630"},{"text":"have identified a close historical or common-law analogue","paragraph_id":"para_631"},{"text":"for their asserted injury.” TransUnion, 594 U.S. at 424. And,","paragraph_id":"para_632"},{"text":"as explained supra, the Court identified discrete privacy torts","paragraph_id":"para_633"},{"text":"(not a general right to privacy) and evaluated plaintiffs’","paragraph_id":"para_634"},{"text":"claims based on their similarity to the harm protected by the","paragraph_id":"para_635"},{"text":"defamation tort.","paragraph_id":"para_636"},{"text":"More important, we need not revisit Eichenberger and In","paragraph_id":"para_637"},{"text":"re Facebook in reaching our decision today. Despite the","paragraph_id":"para_638"},{"text":"broad statements made therein, those decisions still","paragraph_id":"para_639"},{"text":"accounted for the individual circumstances giving rise to the","paragraph_id":"para_640"},{"text":"plaintiffs’ alleged injuries rather than simply greenlighting a","paragraph_id":"para_641"},{"text":"per se rule for privacy statutes. See In re Facebook, 956 F.3d","paragraph_id":"para_642"},{"text":"at 598 (“Plaintiffs alleged that Facebook continued to collect","paragraph_id":"para_643"},{"text":"their data after they had logged off the social media platform,","paragraph_id":"para_644"},{"text":"in order to receive and compile their personally identifiable","paragraph_id":"para_645"},{"text":"browsing history. As alleged in the complaint, this tracking","paragraph_id":"para_646"},{"text":"occurred ‘no matter how sensitive’ or personal users’","paragraph_id":"para_647"},{"text":"browsing histories were.”) (emphasis added); see also","paragraph_id":"para_648"},{"text":"Phillips, 74 F.4th at 993. Moreover, both cases involved","paragraph_id":"para_649"},{"text":"POPA V. MICROSOFT CORPORATION 21","paragraph_id":"para_650"},{"text":"different statutes from the Pennsylvania statute, WESCA, at","paragraph_id":"para_651"},{"text":"issue in this case. For example, in Eichenberger, the plaintiff","paragraph_id":"para_652"},{"text":"sued under the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988.","paragraph_id":"para_653"},{"text":"Eichenberger, 876 F.3d at 981–84. Perhaps we might","paragraph_id":"para_654"},{"text":"analyze that statute differently today, especially after the","paragraph_id":"para_655"},{"text":"Supreme Court’s decision in TransUnion, but we need not","paragraph_id":"para_656"},{"text":"reach that issue to decide whether Popa has adequately","paragraph_id":"para_657"},{"text":"alleged standing in this case. For the reasons stated above,","paragraph_id":"para_658"},{"text":"she has not. The district court’s ruling on the motions to","paragraph_id":"para_659"},{"text":"dismiss is AFFIRMED.","paragraph_id":"para_660"}],"word_count":5512,"cites":["594 U.S. 413","578 U.S.\n330","504 U.S. 555","489 U.S. 749","118 F.4th\n1134","654 F.3d 919","48 F.4th 1236","93 F.4th 136","78 F.4th 976","942\nF.3d 480","84 F.4th 731","876 F.3d\n979","956 F.3d 589","85 F.4th 570","671 F.3d 969","74 F.4th 986"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"8c93f2868c48031cb15d8228cd6cec59af72f053da594565a6bc9e367bb5c4a4","source_url":"https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/08/26/24-14.pdf","fetched_at":"2026-10-02T05:19:26.306+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/ca9-24-14-2025-08-26","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca9-24-14-2025-08-26","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca9-24-14-2025-08-26","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ca9-24-14-2025-08-26","verification":{"stored_sha256":"8c93f2868c48031cb15d8228cd6cec59af72f053da594565a6bc9e367bb5c4a4","recomputed_sha256":"8c93f2868c48031cb15d8228cd6cec59af72f053da594565a6bc9e367bb5c4a4","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-17T18:37:06.814Z"}},"hash":"sha256:f6c234c7d77bcf6a4523ddbd4a439d4b63383c2a95ddbf89ac41b9d5ba29966f","version":"legal-2026-10-17","expires":"2026-10-18T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-17+legal-2026-10-17+2026-10-17T17:42:33","content_hash":"sha256:f6c234c7d77bcf6a4523ddbd4a439d4b63383c2a95ddbf89ac41b9d5ba29966f","revalidate_after":"2026-10-17T19:37:06.999Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca9-24-14-2025-08-26","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca9-24-14-2025-08-26"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca9-24-14-2025-08-26"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ca9-24-14-2025-08-26"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/us/praxis/ca9-24-14-2025-08-26","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-a79ac8b97829a6821037faf7229fb905","response_hash":"sha256:f6c234c7d77bcf6a4523ddbd4a439d4b63383c2a95ddbf89ac41b9d5ba29966f"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-03T11:21:28.185Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us%3Aca9-24-14-2025-08-26&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":25866}}