1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 COLIN R. BRICKMAN, Case No. 16-cv-00751-WHO 8 Plaintiff, ORDER RE JUDGMENT 9 Vv. 10 FACEBOOK, INC., ll Defendant. 12 I have reviewed the Joint Report On Meet-And-Confer Efforts (Dkt. No. 153) following 5 13 || my September 15, 2021 order denying plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a second amended 14 |} complaint (Dkt. No. 152). In that order, I assumed the truth of the existing allegations in 3 15 || plaintiff's First Amended Complaint and the additional allegations in his proposed Second a 16 || Amended Complaint, and considered the Declaration of Randall A. Snyder (Dkt. No. 133-1). The 3 17 || parties were on notice that I would test plaintiffs existing and proposed allegations regarding 18 defendant’s conduct under Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid,

(2021). Dkt. No. 132. 19 || Having determined that plaintiffs existing and proposed allegations were not sufficient as a matter 20 || of law, I denied as futile plaintiffs motion for leave to file the proposed Second Amended 21 Complaint. Dkt. No. 152. 22 The parties had a full and fair opportunity to present their arguments and have me consider 23 || the sufficiency of plaintiffs allegations, including those based on the Snyder declaration. 24 || Accordingly, judgment will be entered in favor of defendant. Plaintiffs right to appeal from entry 25 || of judgment following the motion denying him leave to amend is fully preserved. 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. | . 27 || Dated: September 23, 2021 4 C0 Mm. Ortick 28 United States District Judge