On Tuesday, YouTube content creators filed a motion requesting the Northern District of California grant them leave to file a motion for reconsideration and enter final judgment to allow the plaintiffs to expedite their appeal in Newman et al v. Google LLC et al.
As previously covered by Law Street Media, the plaintiffs, Kimberly Carleste Newman, Lisa Cabrera, Catherine Jones and Denotra Nicole Lewis, are YouTube content creators and identify as African American women who accused Google and YouTube of systematically filtering out content from creators based on their personal identities and viewpoints. Additionally, the plaintiffs stated the proposed class would total around 42 million people.
However, the court dismissed the case in June 2021, again in July 2022 and most recently in November, each time finding that there was no basis for the plaintiffs’ claims of discrimination. In the most recent dismissal, the court held that the plaintiffs failed to identify the characteristics that the algorithm had allegedly considered while discriminating nor facts to adequately allege that the plaintiffs have been treated differently based on those characteristics. Through the November dismissal, the court granted the plaintiffs one final chance to amend their complaint and asserted that the plaintiffs should streamline and condense their amended complaint as much as possible.
In response, the plaintiffs filed the present motion asking the court to reconsider and clarify portions of its order to allow them to properly allege their breach of contract claim in the fifth amended complaint. Specifically, the plaintiffs request clarification if the defendants removal or restriction of content in a manner inconsistent with the Terms of Service or other rules is sufficient by itself to establish breach of contract.
In addition to the plaintiffs’ request for leave to file a motion for reconsideration, the plaintiffs ask the court to enter final judgment on the previously decided discrimination, Liberty of Speech and Lanham Act claims to expedite their appeal to the Ninth Circuit.