3/14/2018 12:04 AM
18CV09778
1
2
3
4
5

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE STATE OF OREGON

6

FOR MULTNOMAH COUNTY

7
8
9
10

ARIEL HAWKINS, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,

11

Plaintiff,

12

vs.

13
14
15

IAC/INTERACTIVECORP
dba TINDER,
Defendant.

16
17

Case No.
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Injunctive Relief
ORS 659A.403
ORS 659A.885
Not Subject to Mandatory Arbitration
Jury Trial Demanded
Fee Authority: ORS 21.135(1)

18

1.

19
20

Ariel Hawkins (plaintiff) is a trans woman and a Portland, Oregon area

21

resident. She files this lawsuit on behalf of herself and all other Oregon users who

22

Tinder discriminated against by deleting their accounts because they were not

23
24

cisgender.
2.

25
26
27
28

The Court has jurisdiction to resolve this legal dispute because it arises under
Oregon law. The majority of Tinder’s users in Oregon reside in or around Multnomah
County.
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT – Page 1 of 10

 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

3.

25

IAC/INTERACTIVECORP (Tinder) is a multibillion-dollar Delaware holding

26

corporation that owns Tinder, a location-based mobile dating app that permits users

27

to communicate with each other based on likes and dislikes. Tinder conducts regular,

28

sustained business in Multnomah County, Oregon.

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT – Page 2 of 10

 1

4.

2
3
4

Tinder is a “place of public accommodation” as that term is used in ORS
659A.400 because Tinder is a service offering public accommodations, advantages

5
6

and privileges in the use of its mobile dating app services for tens of thousands of

7

local Oregon users to meet and hookup.

8
9
10

5.
On March 10, 2018, shortly after plaintiff edited her profile to disclose the fact

11

that she was a preop trans woman, Tinder deleted plaintiff’s account. Tinder deleted

12

plaintiff’s account for the sole reason that she identified as a trans woman. Tinder

13

sent plaintiff an email stating that her account was allegedly deleted for violating

14
15
16

its terms of service. As of the date of this lawsuit, Tinder has refused multiple
requests to explain what terms of service plaintiff allegedly violated.

17
18

6.
Recent news articles and online complaints from other members of the trans

19
20

community suggest plaintiff is not alone. At trial, evidence will show Tinder has a

21

pattern and practice of discriminating against Oregon users like plaintiff who are

22

not cisgender.

23
24
25
26
27
28

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT – Page 3 of 10

 1

7.

2
3
4

Plaintiff’s profile that Tinder deleted was substantially similar to the image
below.

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

8.
While on Tinder, plaintiff did not violate any of its terms of service. Plaintiff
did not post any links or any content that was hate speech, threatening, sexually

25

explicit or pornographic. Plaintiff did not post any content that incited violence or

26

that contained nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence. Plaintiff did not use Tinder

27

for any commercial purpose and did not solicit money from or defraud any users.

28

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT – Page 4 of 10

 1
2
3
4

9.
On March 10, 2018, Tinder refused to provide plaintiff full and equal access
to its app by deleting her account because she was not cisgender. Tinder refused

5
6

multiple requests to identify the term of service plaintiff’s profile allegedly violated.

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

10.

19
20

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

21

The class consists of all Oregon non-cisgender Tinder users who, within one

22

year before the date of the filing of this complaint, suffered discrimination by having

23
24

had their Tinder profiles deleted on account of their gender and sex. Excluded from

25

the class are all attorneys for the class, officers and directors of Tinder, including

26

officers and directors of any entity with an ownership interest in Tinder, any judge

27

who sits on the case, and all jurors and alternate jurors who sit on the case.

28

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT – Page 5 of 10

 1

11.

2
3
4

The class is so numerous that joinder is impracticable. The size of the Oregon
class is in the hundreds and will be determined based on Tinder’s account records

5
6

and claims forms submitted by Oregon Tinder users.
12.

7
8
9
10

Common questions of fact and law predominate over any questions affecting
only individual class members. Common questions include whether Tinder’s service

11

is a “public accommodation” under Oregon law, whether Tinder’s choice to delete the

12

accounts of non-cisgender users constituted “discrimination” or “restriction” under

13

Oregon law, and whether Tinder acted maliciously. Upon discovery of evidence of

14
15
16

Tinder’s malice, plaintiff intends to amend this complaint to include a claim for
punitive damages.

17
18

13.
Plaintiff’s claim is typical of the claims of the class because each were

19
20

discriminated against and restricted by Tinder based on their gender and sex, and

21

plaintiff’s claims for relief are based upon the same legal theories as are the claims

22

of the class members.

23
24
25
26
27
28

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT – Page 6 of 10

 1

14.

2
3
4

Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect and represent the interests of the
class because her claims are typical of the claims of the class, she is represented by

5
6

nationally known and locally respected attorneys who have experience handling

7

class action litigation who are qualified and competent, and who will vigorously

8

prosecute this litigation, and their interests are not antagonistic or in conflict with

9
10
11
12
13

the interests of the class.
15.
A class action is superior to other available methods for fair and efficient
adjudication of this case because commons questions of law and fact predominate

14
15

over other factors affecting only individual members, as far as plaintiff knows, no

16

class action that purports to include Oregon Tinder users suffering the same injury

17

has been commenced, individual class members have little interest in controlling the

18

litigation, due to the high cost of individual actions, the relatively small amounts of

19
20

damages suffered, and because plaintiff and her attorneys will vigorously pursue the

21

claims. A class action will be an efficient method of adjudicating the claims of the

22

class members who have suffered relatively small monetary damages, as a result of

23
24

the same conduct by Tinder. In the aggregate, class members have claims for relief

25

that are significant in scope relative to the expense of litigation. Injunctive relief will

26

prevent further ongoing harm to Oregon users.

27
28

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT – Page 7 of 10

 1
2
3
4

16.
CLASS CLAIM FOR RELIEF
VIOLATION OF ORS 659A.403

5
6

As alleged in this complaint, Tinder denied plaintiff full and equal

7

accommodations, advantages, and privileges pertaining to its services constituting a

8

place of public accommodation and discriminated against plaintiff on account of her

9
10

gender and sex by deleting her Tinder profile because she was not cisgender. As a

11

result, plaintiff and the putative class are entitled to injunctive relief prohibiting

12

Tinder from continuing to discriminate against non-cisgender users, and

13

reimbursement for fees, costs, and expenses under ORS 659A.885.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT – Page 8 of 10

 1

17.

2
3
4

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
A. An injunction prohibiting Tinder from continuing to discriminate against non-

5
6

cisgender Oregon users,

7

B. An order directing Tinder to preserve all records and other user data

8

pertaining to this case, certifying this matter as a class action under ORCP

9
10
11

32, and reimbursement of litigation fees, costs, and expenses, and
C. Other relief the court deems necessary.

12

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

13
14
15

Plaintiff demands trial by jury as to each issue to which she and the class are
entitled to a jury trial.

16
17

March 14, 2018

18

RESPECTFULLY FILED,

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Mark Geragos, Pro Hac Pending
Ben Meiselas, Pro Hac Pending
Lori Feldman, Pro Hac Pending
Of Attorneys for Plaintiff
Geragos & Geragos
Historic Engine Co. No. 28
644 South Figueroa Street
Los Angeles, California 90017
geragos@geragos.com
Phone 213-625-3900

/s/ Michael Fuller
Michael Fuller, OSB No. 09357
Lead Trial Attorney for Plaintiff
OlsenDaines
US Bancorp Tower
111 SW 5th Ave., Suite 3150
Portland, Oregon 97204
michael@underdoglawyer.com
Direct 503-743-7000
Kelly Jones, OSB No. 074217
Of Attorneys for Plaintiff
The Law Office of Kelly Jones
kellydonovanjones@gmail.com
Phone 503 847-4329

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT – Page 9 of 10

 1
2

PROOF OF MAILING

3

I declare and certify that on the date below I caused a copy of this complaint
to be mailed to the Oregon Attorney General at the following address:

4
5
6
7
8

Ellen Rosenblum
Oregon Attorney General
Oregon Department of Justice
1162 Court Street NE
Salem, Oregon 97301-4096

9
10

March 14, 2018

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

/s/ Michael Fuller
Michael Fuller, OSB No. 09357
Lead Trial Attorney for Plaintiff
OlsenDaines
US Bancorp Tower
111 SW 5th Ave., Suite 3150
Portland, Oregon 97204
michael@underdoglawyer.com
Direct 503-743-7000

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT – Page 10 of 10