You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

CustomGuide v. CAREERBUILDER, LLC

Citations: 813 F. Supp. 2d 990; 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95278; 2011 WL 3809768Docket: 11 C 945

Court: District Court, N.D. Illinois; August 24, 2011; Federal District Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves CustomGuide's lawsuit against CareerBuilder, LLC, initially filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County and later removed to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. CustomGuide alleges breach of contract, violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), Illinois deceptive trade practices, and common law fraud, among other claims. CareerBuilder filed a motion to dismiss, arguing preemption by federal copyright law and insufficient pleadings. The court dismisses several claims without prejudice, including breach of contract, CFAA violations, and claims under the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, citing preemption and failure to meet statutory requirements. The common law fraud claim, however, survives as it pertains to misrepresentations during contract formation. The court also dismisses CustomGuide's accounting claim for lack of allegations regarding the absence of an adequate legal remedy. CustomGuide is granted leave to amend its complaint to address these deficiencies. The court schedules further proceedings, allowing CustomGuide to replead its claims in compliance with federal procedural rules and addressing the potential for preemption in future pleadings.

Legal Issues Addressed

Breach of Contract under Illinois Law

Application: The court examines the requirement for a valid contract in a breach of contract claim, stating the necessity of proving a valid contract, plaintiff's performance, defendant's breach, and resulting injury.

Reasoning: The court will evaluate the claims against the standard for stating a breach of contract under Illinois law, requiring proof of a valid contract, plaintiff's performance, defendant's breach, and resulting injury.

Common Law Fraud in Contract Formation

Application: The court distinguishes fraud claims in contract formation from breach of contract claims, allowing the fraud claim to proceed as it involves misrepresentations made during the contract's inception.

Reasoning: CustomGuide's claim survives as it alleges misrepresentations made during the contract's inception...

Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 'Loss' Requirement

Application: The court finds CustomGuide's claim under the CFAA does not satisfy the statutory definition of 'loss,' which focuses on impairment of computer systems rather than economic costs unrelated to computer systems.

Reasoning: Thus, CustomGuide's claim under the CFAA fails to meet the statutory definition of 'loss' and is dismissed without prejudice.

Copyright Preemption

Application: The court addresses the preemption of state law claims by federal copyright law, emphasizing that rights equivalent to reproduction, adaptation, publication, performance, and display are preempted.

Reasoning: To avoid preemption by federal copyright law, a state law must govern conduct that is distinct from the exclusive rights of reproduction, adaptation, publication, performance, and display.

Equitable Relief via Accounting

Application: The court dismisses CustomGuide's accounting claim for failing to allege the absence of an adequate legal remedy and necessary conditions like breach of fiduciary duty.

Reasoning: CustomGuide's complaint fails to allege the absence of an adequate legal remedy, resulting in the dismissal of its accounting claim without prejudice.

Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act Preemption

Application: The court dismisses CustomGuide's UDTPA claim due to preemption by federal copyright law, as the allegations involve reverse passing off without a distinct extra element.

Reasoning: Consequently, the court concludes that CustomGuide's allegations do not evade preemption, leading to the dismissal of its UDTPA claim without prejudice.