Golden v. NBCUniversal Media

── Golden v. NBCUniversal Media ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Date: April 23, 2026 Category: General 25-2226 Golden v. NBCUniversal Media UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated term of The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 23rd day of April, two thousand twenty- six. PRESENT: SUSAN L. CARNEY, BETH ROBINSON, MYRNA PÉREZ, Circuit Judges. _________________________________________ SHERHONDA GOLDEN, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. No. 25-2226 NBCUNIVERSAL MEDIA, LLC, Defendant-Appellee. _________________________________________ FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT: JOSHUA HAMMACK (Michael L. Murphy, on the brief), Bailey & Glasser, LLP, Washington, D.C. FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLEE: BENJAMIN THOMASSEN (Jeffrey Landis, on the brief), ZwillGen PLLC, Washington, D.C. Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Engelmayer, Judge). UPON DUE CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment entered on September 3, 2025, is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff-Appellant Sherhonda Golden appeals the judgment of the district court that dismissed her Fourth Amended Complaint against Defendant-Appellee NBCUniversal Media, LLC (“NBC”). Golden alleged that NBC violated the Video Privacy Protection Act (“VPPA”), 18 U.S.C. § 2710, by sharing personally identifiable information about her video-watching activity with third parties without her consent. In particular, she alleges that in its website, Today.com, NBC embedded a “Facebook Pixel” that caused a tracking code reflecting her unique Facebook identification number along with the specific videos she had watched to be transmitted to Facebook. The district court granted NBC’s motion to dismiss 2 on the basis of this Court’s decision in Solomon v. Flipps Media, Inc., 136 F.4th 41 (2d Cir. 2025), cert. denied, 146 S.Ct. 885 (Dec. 8, 2025), which held that factually similar allegations failed to state a VPPA claim. See Golden v. NBCUniversal Media, LLC, No. 22-cv-9858, 2025 WL 2530689, at *5–7 (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 3, 2025). 1 We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and issues on appeal, to which we refer only as necessary to explain our decision. “We review the grant of a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) without deference to the district court’s reasoning.” Marcus & Cinelli, LLP v. Aspen American Insurance Co., 158 F.4th 333, 340 (2d Cir. 2025). 2 “If, accepting all factual allegations in the complaint as true and drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff, the complaint fails to plausibly state a claim, then dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) is warranted.” Id. Under the VPPA, “[a] video tape service provider who knowingly discloses, to any person, personally identifiable information concerning any consumer of such provider shall