Overview

• U.S. District Judge Edward Davila denied the companies’ motions to dismiss, ruling they were not acting as publishers when they processed payments for casino-style apps.
• He rejected arguments that providing neutral platform tools restored immunity, emphasizing that the alleged misconduct is the payment processing itself.
• Most consumer-protection claims may proceed except those under California law, and some other state-law claims were dismissed.
• Plaintiffs allege the platforms promoted addictive slot-machine apps and took 30% commissions estimated at more than $2 billion, and they seek compensatory and treble damages.
• Davila authorized an immediate appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; the multi-district litigation, filed in 2021 in the Northern District of California, remains active.