Programmers Have Advanced an 'Unjust Enrichment Claim' Against GitHub

ARGUMENT

VII. PLAINTIFFS’ UNJUST ENRICHMENT, CONSPIRACY, AND DECLARATORY RELIEF ALLEGATIONS FAIL ALONG WITH THE UNDERLYING CLAIMS.

Plaintiffs purport to advance an unjust enrichment claim against GitHub (Count VI), but “there is no cause of action in California for unjust enrichment.” Melchior v. New Line Prods., Inc., 106 Cal. App. 4th 779, 793 (2003); Bosinger v. Belden CDT, Inc., 358 F. App’x 812, 815 (9th Cir. 2009). Nor is civil conspiracy (Count XI) a cause of action under California law. Applied Equip. Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd., 7 Cal. 4th 503, 514 (1994).

Plaintiffs’ declaratory relief claim (Count XII) rests on the viability of underlying claims, and should be dismissed along with them. Count XII also runs afoul of Article III because the Complaint does not set forth a specific requested declaration, let alone make allegations demonstrating an injury that would be redressed by a declaration. See Part I, supra; Lujan, 504 U.S. at 561; see Hobbs v. Sprague, 87 F. Supp. 2d 1007, 1012 (N.D. Cal. 2000) (no standing where Complaint fails to show that an alleged injury would be redressed by a favorable decision).