Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Ferguson v. Active Response Group
Citation: 348 F. App'x 255Docket: No. 08-35709
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; October 8, 2009; Federal Appellate Court
Mark J. Ferguson appeals the district court's grant of partial summary judgment in favor of Quin-street, Inc. The appellate court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and reviews the summary judgment decision de novo, ultimately affirming the lower court's ruling. Ferguson is found to lack standing to pursue his claim under the CAN-SPAM Act (15 U.S.C. § 7701 et seq.), as established in Gordon v. Virtumundo, Inc., where similar circumstances involving a plaintiff with merely provided email accounts and leased server space resulted in a lack of standing. Furthermore, the district court correctly determined that Ferguson's state law claims under Washington Revised Code §§ 19.190.010 et seq. and 19.86.010 et seq. are preempted by the CAN-SPAM Act, consistent with the precedent set in Gordon. The appellate court affirms the lower court's decision, noting that this disposition is not suitable for publication and does not serve as precedent except as outlined by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.