Three plaintiffs sued USA Today alleging the media company embedded third-party trackers on its website that collected IP addresses, device types, and browser information without user consent. Ryan Wu, Saber Khamooshi, and John Deddeh claimed these tracking practices violated California privacy laws and sought to represent a nationwide class of users whose data was allegedly harvested.
U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney dismissed the case for lack of standing, finding that plaintiffs failed to show concrete injury from the alleged data collection. "Internet users have no expectation of privacy in ... IP addresses," Judge Chesney wrote, citing established Ninth Circuit precedent. The court noted that "there is no legally protected privacy interest in information such as device type and browser type" and that plaintiffs must "identify the specific personal information [they] disclosed that implicates a protectable privacy interest."
USA Today had moved to dismiss the consolidated complaint in June 2025, arguing plaintiffs lacked Article III standing to bring their claims under California's Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, the California Invasion of Privacy Act, and other state laws. The case originally named Gannett Co. Inc. as defendant before the company changed its name to USA Today.
The dismissal comes with leave to amend, giving plaintiffs until April 28, 2026, to cure the standing deficiencies or face remand for lack of jurisdiction. The ruling reflects growing judicial skepticism toward privacy claims based on collection of basic technical information, requiring plaintiffs to show collection of truly sensitive personal data to establish concrete harm.