15.  Facebook is the world’s leading online social media and networking platform. Its users  can access Facebook from desktop and laptop computers as well as mobile devices, including smart  phones and tablets. Facebook’s self-proclaimed mission is to “give people the power to build  community and bring the world closer together.”6   16.  As of June 30, 2018, Facebook has more than 2.23 billion monthly users and 1.47 billion  daily active users. Facebook claims that it has “only begun to fulfill” its mission to “bring the world  closer together.”7   17.  As a company, Facebook prides itself on its “hacker culture,” which it describes as “an  environment that rewards creative problem solving and active decision making.”8   B.  Facebook Provides Privacy Settings that Lead Reasonable Consumers to  Believe that They Have Control over Their Private Location Data and History   18.  Facebook’s “Location History” is a record of locations received through the Location  Services setting on users’ smartphones or other devices. Users can view Location History by logging  into Facebook and accessing the “Settings” tab. Because Location History is “on” by default, Facebook  adds current precise location information to users’ Location History and builds a detailed chronology of  users’ location information. According to Facebook, Location History helps users “explore what’s  around,” “get more relevant ads,” and “improve Facebook.”   19.  However, many Facebook users do not want Facebook to build and keep a precise  history of their location. For those users, Facebook offers users the option to turn Location History  “off.”    43.  Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of  all others similarly situated, brings this lawsuit on behalf of himself and as a class action on behalf of the  following Class:   All Facebook users in the United States who turned off “Location History” during the  applicable limitations period. Excluded from the Class are any entities, including  Facebook, and Facebook’s officers, agents, and employees. Also excluded from the  Class are counsel for Plaintiff, the judge assigned to this action, and any member of  the judge’s immediate family.   44.  Members of the Class are so numerous that joinder is impracticable. While the exact  number of class members is unknown to Plaintiff, it is believed that the Class is comprised of millions  of members geographically dispersed throughout the United States.  The Class is readily identifiable  from information and records in the possession of Facebook and third parties.    52.  Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates each and every allegation set forth above as if fully  written herein.   53.  Cal. Pen. Code § 630, part of the California Invasion of Privacy Act (the “CIPA”),  provides: “The Legislature hereby declares that advances in science and technology have led to the  development of new devices and techniques for the purpose of eavesdropping upon private  communications and that the invasion of privacy resulting from the continual and increasing use of  such devices and techniques has created a serious threat to the free exercise of personal liberties and  cannot be tolerated in a free and civilized society.”   54.  Cal. Pen. Code § 637.7 prohibits the use of “an electronic tracking device to determine  the location or movement of a person.” Under section 637.7(d), an “electronic tracking device” means  “any device attached . . . to a movable thing that reveals its location or movement by the transmission  of electronic signals.”   55.  Without the consent of Plaintiff or Class members, Facebook continued to record,  store, and use the location information of Plaintiff and Class members after they disabled the Location  History feature on their mobile phones.   59.  Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates each and every allegation set forth above as if fully  written herein.    60.  Article 1, Section 1 of the California Constitution expressly provides a right to privacy.  This right is enforced through the intrusion tort of invasion of privacy.   68.  Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates each and every allegation set forth above as if fully  written herein.   76.  Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates each and every allegation set forth above as if fully  written herein.   77.  The federal Stored Communications Act (“SCA”) allows a private right of action against  “a person or entity providing an electronic communication service to the public” who “knowingly  divulge(s) to any person or entity the contents of a communication while in electronic storage by that  service.” 18 U.S.C. § 2702(a)(1); see also 18 U.S.C. § 2707(a).   78.  Facebook users, unknowingly and in contravention of their privacy settings, transmit  their private location information, in the form of data, via the Internet from various devices, including  laptop computers and mobile cell phones, to Facebook’s servers. This data constitutes “electronic  communication” under the SCA. The SCA incorporates the definition of “electronic communication”  set forth in the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510, et seq. (“ECPA”). The  ECPA defines an “electronic communication” as “any transfer of signs, signals, writing, images, sounds,  data, or intelligence of any nature transmitted in whole or in part by a wire, radio, electromagnetic,  photoelectronic or photooptical system that affects interstate or foreign commerce . . . .” 18 U.S.C. §  2510(12).   79.  Facebook is an electronic communication service provider covered by the SCA. An  “electronic communication service” is “any service which provides to users thereof the ability to send  or receive wire or electronic communications.” 18 U.S.C. § 2510(15). See Ehling v. Monmouth-Ocean Hosp.  Serv. Corp., 961 F. Supp. 2d 659, 667 (D.N.J. 2013).   87.  Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates each and every allegation set forth above as if fully  written herein.    A.  Facebook’s Social Media Platform   Intrusion Upon Seclusion   Violation of California’s Constitutional Right of Privacy   Violation of the Stored Communications Act  18 U.S.C. §§ 2701, et seq.   Violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act  (Cal. Pen. Code §§ 630, et seq.)   Violation of California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act  Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1750, et seq.  