F.3d 116, *; 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 11909, **
The post-transaction marketing employed by Trilegiant and its e-merchant partners
functions [""3] as follows. Online merchants such as Buy.com ... Priceline.com, Inc.
enter into an arrangement with Trilegiant to permit the advertisement of membership club
programs to their customers. In the course of completing a transaction, a link, banner ... webpage appears on the e-merchant's website advertising a Trilegiant program. A
customer who selects the link is immediately taken to an enrollment page for a Trilegiant
membership product
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01358947.pdf
believing" that the
membership programs were being offered by an e-merchant, rather than Trilegiant, App'x
at 282, but identifies no misrepresentation that induced such a belief. Similarly ... alleges that each time an e-
merchant shared a customer's billing information with Trilegiant, both the e-merchant and
Trilegiant "committed an act of wire fraud ... inherently fraudulent, and the plaintiffs do not identify
any misrepresentation regarding such transfers by Trilegiant or any other defendant.
[' 126] Neither the complaint's specific discussion of Trilegiant's allegedly
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01358952.pdf
datapass" procedure, by which e-merchants share
customers' credit card and billing information with Trilegiant without requiring that the
customers re-enter that information on the Trilegiant enrollment page, constitutes ... electronic communication under the ECPA. The defendants
respond that no unlawful interceptions occurred because Trilegiant disclosed the terms of
the program, including the transfer of the customer's information ... date of
birth and selecting "YES," p122] they authorize the release of information to Trilegiant,
including their "name, email address, and credit card or debit card information to Great
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01358949.pdf
EFTA01358953Set 10
2016-11-091p298w
into the membership agreement. The plaintiffs further claim that the
refund mitigation technique caused Trilegiant to retain an unfair benefit by offering only
partial refunds. But as with their failed ... CUTPA claim, they cannot argue that Trilegiant was
unjustly enriched by not refunding additional, legitimate past membership fees to which its
customers were not entitled. See, e.g., Berger v. Home
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01358953.pdf
EFTA01358943Set 10
2017-10-271p339w
defraud customers of "membership
fees" for rewards programs they unwittingly joined. They allege that Trilegiant Corporation
conspired with e-merchant retailers such as Buy.com, Orbitz, and Priceline to enroll ... identify no actionable fraud, they cannot proceed on a theory of racketeering.
In re Trilegiant Corp., 11 F. Supp. 3d 132, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42572 (D. Conn
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01358943.pdf
EFTA01358942Set 10
2016-01-221p458w
Apollo Global
Management, LLC, Beckett Media LLC, Buy.com, Inc.,
IAC/InteractiveCorp, PeopleFindersPro, Inc., Shoebuy.com,
Inc., Trilegiant Corporation, Wyndham Worldwide Corp.,
Defendants-Appellees, 1-800-Flowers.com, Inc., Adaptive
Marketing, LLC, Days Inns Worldwide
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01358942.pdf