Meta Beats Privacy Suit Over ‘Toxic Men’ Chat Room Scuttlebutt

Meta Platforms Inc. defeated an invasion-of-privacy lawsuit arising from critical comments made about a man in a Facebook chat group aimed at protecting women from “toxic men.”

Plaintiff Nikko D’Ambrosio failed to adequately allege that the statements made about him in the “Are We Dating the Same Guy” chat group related to the commission of a crime or impugned his ability to perform his profession, which was required to support his defamation claims, Judge Sunil R. Harjani of the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois said Tuesday.

D’Ambrosio’s claim of invasion of privacy by false light failed as a necessary consequence of the failure of the defamation claim, Harjani said.

Harjani also dismissed the plaintiff’s claims of unjust enrichment, doxing, products liability, negligence, and violations of the Illinois Right of Publicity Act.

D’Ambrosio filed the lawsuit after he became aware of a post made about him in the Facebook chat group by Abbigail Rajala following a brief period in which they dated. The post included a description of his actions while they were dating, a text message he sent her, and a photo of him.

He named as defendants “anyone remotely associated with those posts for all possible, imaginable claims, including the woman who dated him and her parents, women commenting on posts, the operators of the Facebook group, and Facebook itself,” according to Harjani. Also named as a defendant was Spill the Tea Inc., the owner of the chat group.

Absolute Defense

The plaintiff argued that the statements posted in the chat group were defamatory because they harmed his professional reputation, but Harjani said he failed to identify specific statements made by any of the defendants about his ability to perform his profession.

All of the statements in the chat were comments on his dating etiquette, not his professional ability, and so were not defamatory per se, the judge said.

D’Ambrosio also failed to identify any specific statements that were false, Harjani said. “Truth is an absolute defense to defamation,” he said.

The complaint’s products liability claim against Meta failed because websites aren’t considered products for the purposes of strict liability, and because there were no allegations of physical injury, a requirement for the claim, Harjani said.

The negligence claim against Meta failed because D’Ambrosio failed to respond to the company’s argument that it didn’t owe a duty of care to their users or the public for harmful third-party content, and because he pleaded himself out of court by alleging that he wasn’t a user of Meta’s services, the judge said.

Marc Trent of Chicago represents D’Ambrosio. Latham & Watkins LLP represents Meta. Blaine & Vanzant LLP represents Rajala and her parents. Tabet DiVito and Rothstein LLC represents Spill the Tea.

The case is D’Ambrosio v. Rajala, N.D. Ill., No. 1:24-cv-00678, 5/13/25.