This article needs to be updated.(February 2022) |
Frank v. Gaos | |
---|---|
Argued October 31, 2018 Decided March 20, 2019 | |
Full case name | Theodore H. Frank, et al. v. Paloma Gaos, et al. |
Docket no. | 17-961 |
Citations | 586 U.S. ___ (more) 139 S. Ct. 1041; 203 L. Ed. 2d 404 |
Case history | |
Prior | In re Google Referrer Header Privacy Litig., 87 F. Supp. 3d 1122 (N.D. Cal. 2015); affirmed, 869 F.3d 737 (9th Cir. 2017); cert. granted, 138 S. Ct. 1697 (2018). |
Holding | |
The case is remanded for the courts below to address the plaintiffs’ standing in light of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Per curiam | |
Dissent | Thomas |
Frank v. Gaos, 586 U.S. ___ (2019), was a per curiam decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in a case concerning the practice of cy pres settlements in class action lawsuits. Following oral argument, the court asked the parties to submit supplemental briefs addressing whether the parties had Article III standing to pursue the case in federal courts. Supplemental briefing was completed on December 21, 2018. On March 20, 2019, the court remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit to address the plaintiffs’ standing in light of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins.[1]