PIERO BUGONI V. GOOGLE, INC., No. 21-15360 (9th Cir. 2022)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FEB 24 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PIERO A. BUGONI, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 21-15360 Plaintiff-Appellant, v. D.C. No. 4:20-cv-02883-HSG MEMORANDUM* GOOGLE, INC.; MICROSOFT CORPORATION; YAHOO! INC., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 15, 2022** Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Piero A. Bugoni appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and defamation against search engine operators. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Watison v. Carter, * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Bugoni’s action because defendants have immunity for publishing third party content under the Communications Decency Act. See 47 U.S.C. § 230(c); Zango, Inc. v. Kaspersky Lab, Inc., 568 F.3d 1169, 1174 (9th Cir. 2009) (affirming dismissal of action for injunctive relief where the defendant “is a provider of an ‘interactive computer service’ as defined in the Communications Decency Act of 1996”). AFFIRMED. 2 21-15360

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.