Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 7, 2025

Echeverria-Corzan v. Fox Corporation

Judge
Martinez-Olguin
Docket
3:25-cv-04253
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Motion to DismissCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Sonni Echeverria-Corzan v. Fox Corporation, Judge Martinez-Olguin denied Fox’s motion to dismiss a California privacy claim.

Who this affects

Sonni Echeverria-Corzan, Fox Corporation, Fox News Network, LLC, and the other parties to the case; the parties must submit a supplemental case-management statement by November 20, 2025.

What happened

Sonni Echeverria-Corzan sued Fox Corporation and others. Fox Corporation and Fox News Network, LLC asked the court to dismiss the complaint.

The court found that the complaint plausibly stated a claim under the California Invasion of Privacy Act, a state law concerning privacy violations. The court compared the case with earlier decisions involving online tracking software.

Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin denied the motion to dismiss for the reasons stated at the hearing. The court also ordered the parties to submit a supplemental case-management statement by November 20, 2025.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Echeverria-Corzan v. Fox Corporation · No. 3:25-cv-04253
Judge
Martinez-Olguin
Date
Nov. 7, 2025

Background

Sonni Echeverria-Corzan brought this case against Fox Corporation and others. Fox Corporation and Fox News Network, LLC filed a motion to dismiss. The court heard that motion on November 6, 2025.

Legal issue

The complaint asserted a claim under the California Invasion of Privacy Act, or CIPA, California Penal Code sections 630 and following. The court considered whether the complaint plausibly stated such a claim based on allegations involving online tracking software. It found the technology sufficiently similar to technology discussed in earlier Northern and Southern District of California decisions that found online tracking software could violate CIPA. The opinion states that the court gave its reasons at the hearing but does not provide those reasons in detail.

Ruling

The court denied the motion to dismiss. The court also held an initial case-management conference and ordered the parties to submit a supplemental case-management statement by November 20, 2025.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.