Willenken, led by Managing Partner Kenneth Trujillo-Jamison, secured three appellate victories for a major social media company in litigation testing the boundaries of platform liability, online speech, user-generated content, copyright law, privacy-related claims, and alleged coordination between private actors and government entities.
In each matter, plaintiffs advanced expansive theories seeking to convert private platform conduct into broader constitutional, statutory, or platform-governance liability. In all three cases, the appellate courts affirmed dismissal.
Most recently, Willenken represented the platform in a Ninth Circuit appeal arising from claims alleging privacy violations, data-security failures, emotional distress, consumer protection violations, and related statutory and common-law theories. The plaintiff sought to impose liability based on the alleged disclosure and misuse of his personal information and pursued substantial damages. After the district court entered judgment in favor of the platform and rejected multiple post-judgment challenges, the plaintiff appealed. On July 31, 2026, the Ninth Circuit affirmed dismissal in full, rejecting the plaintiff’s efforts to revive the claims and bringing the matter to a favorable conclusion for the client.
In the Second Circuit, Willenken represented the platform and related defendants in a civil-rights action involving allegations about law enforcement, private security, content moderation, and access to the platform’s leadership. The plaintiff sought to connect private platform actors to alleged government conduct and constitutional violations. The Second Circuit affirmed dismissal, holding that the plaintiff had not plausibly alleged joint action between the platform-related defendants and law enforcement. The court also affirmed denial of reconsideration, and rehearing en banc was later denied.
In the Fifth Circuit, Willenken represented the platform in a copyright and platform-liability appeal arising from allegations that users posted copyrighted material on the platform and that the company failed to act on related complaints. The case became procedurally complex, involving several emergency motions, sanctions requests, and challenges to the platform’s internal operations. The Fifth Circuit affirmed dismissal.
Together, these victories ended several difficult cases at the appellate level for our client. Collectively, the decisions span online speech, constitutional claims, copyright, moderation, privacy-related allegations, user-generated content, and platform governance. For companies operating where digital content, user conduct, intellectual property, privacy, and public scrutiny intersect, the results demonstrate the value of disciplined defense work that narrows sprawling allegations, preserves strong appellate positions, and prevents novel theories from becoming lasting litigation risk.
