Two-Step Analysis of the Anti-SLAPP Statute in California, Invoked in X’s Lawsuit Against Ccdh

Written by legalpdf | Published 2024/03/29
Tech Story Tags: x-v-ccdh | free-speech | x-lawsuit | anti-slapp-statute | california-anti-slapp-laws | x-lawsuit-details | x-data-breach-lawsuit | countering-digital-hate

TLDRX (formerly Twitter) is suing the Center for Countering Digital Hate for accessing its data and publishing misleading reports. The case involves anti-SLAPP laws and Rule 12(b)(6) standards for dismissing claims.via the TL;DR App

X Corp. v. Center for Countering Digital Hate, INC. Court Filing, retrieved on March 25, 2024 is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part in this filing here. This part is 6 of 19.

A. Anti-SLAPP

CCDH moves to strike the California causes of action pursuant to the anti-SLAPP statute. MTD&S at 8–9. A moving defendant must, at the first step, make a prima facie showing that the state law claims “arise from any act in furtherance of the person’s right of petition or free speech” “in connection with a public issue.” Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(b)(1); Makaeff v. Trump Univ., LLC, 715 F.3d 254, 261 (9th Cir. 2013). If the defendant makes that showing, the court then considers whether the plaintiff has, at the second step, demonstrated “a reasonable probability” of prevailing on the merits of its claims. In re NCAA Student-Athlete Name & Likeness Licensing Litig., 724 F.3d 1268, 1273 (9th Cir. 2013) (quoting Batzel v. Smith, 333 F.3d 1018, 1024 (9th Cir. 2003)). This order will now address the first step: whether CCDH has made the required prima facie showing. This order will go on to address the second step on a claim-by-claim basis, applying a 12(b)(6) standard. See Planned Parenthood Fed’n of Am., Inc., 890 F.3d at 834.

Continue Reading Here.


About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings.

This court case retrieved on March 25, 2024, from storage.courtlistener is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction.


Written by legalpdf | Legal PDFs of important tech court cases are far too inaccessible for the average reader... until now.
Published by HackerNoon on 2024/03/29