Hi, CIPAWorld! Kelly Sandberg here, with yet another case discussing the need for a California Court’s assessment on the issue of whether the California Invasion of Privacy Act § 638.51 applies to internet communications.
In Dominique Nelson v. Reddit Inc., Plaintiff Dominique Nelson brought action against Defendant Reddit, Inc. for violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”) § 638.50 (b) and § 638.51(a) for using a third-party tracking tool on their website that constituted a pen register used without prior consent or court order. Dominique Nelson v. Reddit Inc., No. 25-CV-1470 JLS (AHG), 2026 WL 2692179 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2026).
Reddit owns and operates the popular social media website, Reddit.com. Plaintiff Nelson was a Reddit website user and brought this action alleging that, while using Reddit’s website, a third-party tracking tool by LiveRamp was placed onto a visitor’s internet browser to capture their IP address and place a cookie into the user’s browser cache.
From an IP address, one can derive the device’s state, city, and zip code. The cookies placed into a user’s browser cache when a user visits Reddit’s website are then later received by LiveRamp, which transmits the stored data for ongoing analysis and personalized ad delivery.
Reddit filed a motion to stay the proceedings until the California Court of Appeal determines if CIPA § 638.51 applies to online technology or if it is limited to telephonic technology. Reddit’s stay was based on the pending resolution of two proceedings, but the Court was only convinced to stay the current case pending the decision of Variety Media, LLC v. Super. Ct. of the State of Cal., No. B350578 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 21, 2025).
“When determining whether to stay an action, a court must weigh competing interests that the grant or denial of a stay will affect, including: (1) ‘the possible damage which may result from the granting of a stay;’ (2) ‘the hardship or inequity which a party may suffer in being required to go forward;’ and (3) ‘the orderly course of justice measured in terms of the simplifying or complicating of issues, proof, and questions of law which could be expected to result from a stay.’” Dominique Nelson v. Reddit Inc., No. 25-CV-1470 JLS (AHG), 2026 WL 2692179, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2026) (citations omitted).
In determining the balance of hardship or inequity to the parties, the Court rejected Plaintiff’s concerns that a stay would be indefinite because it was unknown whether the California Court of Appeal would ultimately issue its opinion on CIPA § 638.51. They also rejected Plaintiff’s concerns about potential spoliation of evidence where mitigation of that problem was available, assuming the parties abided by their obligation to preserve information in their possession, custody, or control that may be relevant to the litigation.
The Court agreed with Reddit’s contention that they would be prejudiced by moving forward without a clear answer from the California Court of Appeals and found that the potential outcome in Variety Media LLC would not just dictate the scope of discovery, but could eliminate the claim at issue.
In determining the orderly course of justice, the Court found that the prospect of narrowing the factual and legal issues at hand would justify a stay. Although it was not certain that the decision in Variety Media would settle every question of fact and law, a stay in the claim here would further the orderly course of justice, promote judicial economy, and avoid wasting judicial resources.
Overall, the Court found that “[g]ranting a stay when Variety Media is dispositive of all claims is consistent with the approach taken by other federal courts.” Dominique Nelson v. Reddit Inc., No. 25-CV-1470 JLS (AHG), 2026 WL 2692179 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2026).
The Southern District of California previously granted a stay in Maeve Camplisson, also pending the outcome of Variety Media LLC, even when only one factor weighed heavily in favor of a stay. Maeve Camplisson; David Sanchez; & S.D. v. Adidas America, Inc., No. 25-CV-00603-GPC-GC, 2026 WL 2521849 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 26, 2026).
So far, a pattern of stay issuance has resulted, pending the outcome of Variety Media LLC, and we are (im)patiently waiting to review the California Court of Appeal’s decision regarding this issue.
Additionally, as we await the outcome of Variety Media LLC, a possible signature on California’s Senate Bill 690 is still pending and may change the outcome of these CIPA claims all together.