Facebook Targeted Ads Class Action Dismissed

A class action lawsuit arguing that Amazon, Cox, and T-Mobile’s targeted Facebook ads are discriminatory has been thrown out by a California federal judge.

Although the allegations were dismissed, the judge has given customers who filed the claims an opportunity to amend their complaint and advised them on how to move forward.

The amendment could give Facebook users another chance to argue that the companies chose not to show employment ads to older Facebook users and this amounted to age discrimination.

The decision to dismiss was made by U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman. She agreed with Amazon and T-Mobile’s assertion that the Facebook users do not have standing to claim that they were injured by ads for jobs that they did not see, saying that the point made by Amazon and T-Mobile is “well-taken.” 

Facebook users had argued that companies including Amazon, Cox, and T-Mobile targeted employment ads to some users, but had prevented other users from seeing the ads. According to the Facebook users, this practice was discriminatory because it prevented older users from seeing seem of the ads. 

Though the Facebook users say that they were economically injured by this discrimination because they were effectively denied employment, the judge agrees with the companies’ assertions that the Facebook users have not sufficiently linked economic injury to their assertion that they did not see certain job ads. 

The judge poked holes in some logic presented by Facebook users and agreed with the companies’ statement that there are many factors that could affect employment. Judge Freeman also agreed that merely because a worker saw an ad does not mean that they would be then hired and paid for it. 

However, the judge determined that the argument that the Facebook users were financially injured by not being able to apply for jobs could be properly alleged.

According to the recent dismissal order, the named plaintiffs did not say that they would have applied to certain jobs had they seen the ads for them. Judge Freeman notes that, if they had made such an allegation, this would have made them better representatives for their proposed Class.

For this reason, Judge Freeman does allow the Facebook users to amend their complaint.

For the time being, their arguments to this point are “too vague and conclusory to establish that the named plaintiffs…personally experienced the complained-of injuries,” decided the judge.

The judge stated that a weak point in the customers’ claims was present in that the named plaintiffs’ experience did not adequately speak to the kind of injury that the targeted ad class action lawsuit alleges took place.

In speaking to this distinction between the named plaintiffs and the rest of the proposed Class, she points to a decision made in another class action lawsuit, in which it was determined that “members of a disfavored group do not automatically have a ‘direct stake in the controversy.’”

Instead, says Judge Freeman, these members without a direct stake are judged to be “‘concerned bystanders’ unless they personally experience the discriminatory conduct.”

According to Judge Freeman, this difference is at play in an issue of age-based discrimination. The judge says that named plaintiffs must prove that they themselves were injured, not just that others were injured by discriminatory conduct.

The judge goes on to say that a similar logic applies to the Facebook users’ claim that they suffer “stigmatic injury” by being subjected to age discrimination. Judge Freeman was unconvinced, saying that not all people who are discriminated against are stigmatized. Based on this, the judge decided to throw out these claims.

Counsel for the plaintiffs is reportedly still determined to fight for their case in court, and even seeing the ruling as “very positive,” according to Law360.

“We’re still in the ballgame,” plaintiff counsel said. “The court provided a roadmap of the types of allegations that would satisfy the court’s concerns on standing and personal jurisdiction and we think this will be an easy threshold for us to satisfy.”

Do you get targeted ads on Facebook? Tell us about your experience with these ads below.

The Facebook users are represented by Jahan C. Sagafi, P. David Lopez, Peter Romer-Friedman, Adam T. Klein, Robert N. Fisher and Jared W. Goldman of Outten & Golden LLP and Patricia Shea and Katherine A. Roe of the Communications Workers of America.

The T-Mobile, Amazon, Cox Online Job Ad Class Action Lawsuit is Communications Workers of America, et al. v. T-Mobile US Inc., Case No. 5:17-cv-07232-BLF, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Facebook Class Action Says Graphic Images Cause Moderators PTSD

New 9/11 Related Illnesses Research Links PTSD to Early Death

Police Intervention Lawsuit Filed Against Montreal Over Excessive Force

Black Lung Disease Once More on the Rise