Dawn Fregosa v. Mashable, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied Mashable, Inc.’s motion to certify the court’s order denying dismissal for interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). The court found that, although the proposed appeal involved a controlling legal question and could materially advance the litigation, Mashable failed to show substantial grounds for a difference of opinion regarding whether the California Invasion of Privacy Act applies to the alleged use of website pen registers.

Holdings

1. Certification was denied because Mashable failed to demonstrate substantial grounds for difference of opinion, even though the court agreed that the CIPA applicability question was controlling and that an immediate appeal could potentially resolve the litigation.
2. A stay was denied because the motion to certify for interlocutory appeal was denied.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court's order denying Mashable's motion to dismiss presented a controlling question of law, substantial grounds for difference of opinion, and an issue for which immediate appeal could materially advance termination of the litigation under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
2. Whether the proceedings should be stayed pending the requested interlocutory appeal.

Disposition

other