Whether Article III permits a federal court to entertain a state law cause of action for deceptively procuring non-private information when the statute proscribes taking different private information, and whether Article III permits a federal court to rule on the merits of a voluntarily abandoned claim

This petition arises out of a removed state law statutory damages class action, alleging that Defendant Twitter violated RCW 9.26A.140 by deceptively procuring and then selling users’ cell phone numbers. In the district court, Plaintiff Morgan sought remand for lack of Article III harm. When the court denied that motion, he sought leave to amen d to remove allegations concerning sales. Although that was denied, he affirm-atively abandoned the sales claim. The court denied a renewed motion to remand, then ruled against him on the merits of both claims. The Ninth Circuit affirmed, finding Article III harm for the procurement claim because the statute proscribes procuring call logs even though Morgan never alleged that Twitter procured his or any person’s call logs. It found standing as to the abandoned sales claim because the fact allegations remained in the last-filed Complaint. The questions presented are: 1. Whether Article III permits a federal court to entertain a state law cause of action for deceptively procuring non-private information, specifically, a telephone number, simply be cause the statute also proscribes taking different private information, not at issue in the lawsuit. 2. Whether Article III permits a federal court to rule on the merits of a claim that a plaintiff has voluntarily, affirmatively abandoned.