Yes, that’s true. However, if someone wants to “create a new account,” they can stop at the first button and then have no reason to look at the rest. This is like the Specht case. With an interface like this, the call-to-action should be above the buttons, not below

The interposition of so many distractor buttons between the button and the call-to-action is materially different from the Uber interface, which is much cleaner. To me, this looks like the unsuccessful Redbox interface, which had several seemingly-irrelevant buttons between the user-selected button (like “Create a new account”) and the call-to-action explaining the consequences of selecting that button.

I think the reason the flow is designed this way—and perhaps the reason the court accepts it—is because all the choices you are calling “distractor buttons” (except for “Log in with your email”) are also methods of creating an account. (See page 2 of the order: “When creating an account, a user is presented with a screen … that provides various ways to sign up for an account.”) The “By signing up…” text is meant to apply to all those buttons.