Back to District Court — Hoang et al v. Inc

[Post by Venkat]

Hoang et al v. Inc., Case No. 08-cv-03518-MMC (N.D. Cal.) is a spam case that’s generated some blog fodder, to say the least: “CAN-Spam-a-Friend?–Hoang v.,” “ Revisited,” and “ Revisited Again: Claims Under CA Spam Law Not Preempted by CAN-SPAM.” In the last round, the trial court reconsidered its prior orders and decided that the claims asserted by plaintiffs under California law were not preempted by CAN-SPAM.

Reunion sought to appeal this order. Denials of motions to dismiss are not typically appealable, but here Reunion sought and obtained an order from the district court certifying the court’s most recent order (denying Reunion’s motion to dismiss) for immediate appeal. Reunion then sought permission in the Ninth Circuit to have the appeal heard. The Ninth Circuit recently issued an order declining to hear the interlocutory appeal. This means that the case is now back in Judge Chesney’s court. Judge Chesney also granted Reunion’s request to stay discovery pending the appeal to the Ninth Circuit. As a result, the case is now just getting under way, a full two years after it was first filed! It’s also worth mentioning that one of the two lawyers representing plaintiffs withdrew. I wouldn’t read anything into this, but I only mention it because I mentioned this firm in a previous post, as having represented defendants in spam lawsuits (who happened to be on the plaintiffs’ side in this case). [Correction: one of the lawyers working for one of the firms on the plaintiffs’ side is no longer working on the case. I misread this and thought one of the firms withdrew. My mistake, and thanks for the heads up!]