Reaud v. Facebook, Inc.

Background

Alfred P. Reaud, proceeding without a lawyer, sued Facebook, Inc. He asserted claims for sexual harassment and intentional infliction of emotional distress based on allegedly pornographic photographs or advertisements he received while using Facebook. Reaud alleged that he saw 93 unwanted and offensive pornographic advertisements in the sponsored section of his Facebook page.

Facebook moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim or, alternatively, to transfer the case under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Facebook relied on a forum-selection clause in its Terms of Service. That clause required Facebook users to resolve claims arising from or relating to the Terms of Service or Facebook exclusively in the federal court for the Northern District of California or a state court in San Mateo County.

Arguments and Recommendation

Reaud argued that venue was proper in Colorado because he had revoked his consent to the forum-selection clause by emailing Facebook’s counsel, a substantial part of the events occurred in Colorado, and enforcement of the clause would be unreasonable and unfair because California was distant and inconvenient. He also argued in his objection that the clause resulted from undue influence and unequal bargaining power.

United States Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews recommended granting Facebook’s request to transfer the case and denying its dismissal request as moot. Judge Crews concluded that the forum-selection clause was enforceable and that Reaud had not shown the extraordinary circumstances needed to avoid transfer. Reaud objected to that recommendation.

Court’s Analysis

Judge Nina Y. Wang reviewed the properly challenged portions of the recommendation independently. The court agreed with Judge Crews that Reaud had not shown a legal basis for unilaterally revoking his agreement to the forum-selection clause. The court also noted that Reaud had previously stated that he continued using Facebook, while later asserting that he had stopped using it; the court treated that later argument as barred because it contradicted his earlier position.

The court declined to consider Reaud’s argument about undue influence and unequal bargaining power because he had raised it for the first time in his objection. The court also explained that the description of the images as “allegedly” pornographic merely reflected that the allegations had not yet been proven.

Disposition

The court overruled Reaud’s objection and adopted Judge Crews’s recommendation in its entirety. It granted Facebook’s motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice or, alternatively, to transfer venue; ordered the action transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; and directed the clerk to complete the transfer and close the Colorado case. The court treated Facebook’s request for dismissal as moot rather than deciding whether the complaint stated a claim.