TrustLabs, Inc. v. An

Opinion

TRUSTLABS, INC., Case No. 21-cv-02606-CRB

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR v. ENTRY OF JUDGMENT UNDER RULE 54(b) Defendant.

Plaintiff TrustLabs, Inc. moves for an entry of final judgment and a judgment of $8,203.79 against Defendant Daniel Jaiyong An under Rule 54(b). Mot. (dkt. 162). TrustLabs contends that the Court’s prior order granting summary judgment for TrustLabs warrants this outcome because the Court found that TrustLabs had shown that it suffered over $6,000 in damages based on An’s conduct. Id. at 3; see also MSJ Order (dkt. 150) at 4 (concluding that TrustLabs had met the $6,000 damages threshold for statutory standing). But the Court did not grant summary judgment with respect to damages under California’s Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act. MSJ Order at 8. And for good reason: the question whether a plaintiff has satisfied their statutory standing requirements is distinct from the question of how much damages they can actually recover. See, e.g., Clayworth v. Pfizer, Inc., 49 Cal. 4th 758, 789 (2010) (explaining the difference between “the issue of standing [and] the issue of the remedies to which a party may be entitled”). Accordingly, the Court denies TrustLabs’ motion for entry of judgment. Dated: April 11, 2025