### Fact Pattern for Consumer who lives in Canada, and is Canadian citizen.

I forgo naming territories and provinces, because this fact pattern has happened to Canadians across provinces. But Consumer is not American citizen, and is not connected to California. Premise that Consumer has done nothing wrong, Consumer has not paid any money to Meta, and Consumer has a contract with Meta.<sup>⓵</sup>

Meta suspended Consumer's Facebook or Instagram account [for no reason at all, or for a wrong reason](https://old.reddit.com/r/facebookdisabledme). Consumer emailed Meta Inc. multiple times, and sent multiple letters by registered mail. Consumer can prove registered letter's delivery to, and receipt by, Meta Inc. But Meta never responded to Consumer. 

# Questions

1. What jurisdiction or court must Consumer file her Claim against Meta Inc.? Can Consumer sue in her Canadian province or territory? 

2. What are Consumer's causes of action? 

3. I am iffy about [Andrew Oh-Willeke's answer](https://law.stackexchange.com/a/84313), as he doesn't cite the following paragraph from [Instagram's Help Center revised 26 July 2022](https://help.instagram.com/581066165581870).

>#### How We Will Handle Disputes.
>
>If you are a consumer, the laws of the country in which you reside will apply to any claim, cause of action, or dispute you have against us that arises out of or relates to these Terms ("claim"), and you may resolve your claim in any competent court in that country that has jurisdiction over the claim. In all other cases, you agree that the claim must be resolved exclusively in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California or a state court located in San Mateo County, that you submit to the personal jurisdiction of either of these courts for the purpose of litigating any such claim, and that the laws of the State of California will govern these Terms and any claim, without regard to conflict of law provisions. Without prejudice to the foregoing, you agree that, in its sole discretion, Meta Platforms Inc. may also bring any claim we have against you related to efforts to abuse, interfere, or engage with our products in unauthorized ways in the country in which you reside that has jurisdiction over the claim. 



### <sup>⓵</sup> Postulate that  Consumer has a contract with Meta Inc. 

[Clifton Gilley](https://www.gartner.com/analyst/89180/Clifton-Gilley) has  J.D. from Seattle University School of Law, cum laude. On [Quora](https://www.quora.com/With-no-apparent-consideration-from-the-user-how-can-the-user-service-agreement-for-a-site-like-Facebook-be-a-legally-binding-contract/answer/Cliff-G-13), Gilley wrote

>Consideration is merely "something of value"; it need not be money, though many think that is so. Facebook is offering you usage of their service, which they consider "something of value" in exchange for your agreement to the terms of service. The user agrees to grant Facebook license to use their content in certain ways, and that license is also "something of value." That is technically sufficient to create a binding contract.
>
>Facebook collects and uses a **massive** amount of user-generated data on a daily basis to sell advertising and for other purposes; there is certainly valuable consideration being given by the user here.

[Jennifer Ellis](https://jlellis.net/detailed-biography/) has JD from Widener University School of Law in Delaware. On [Quora](https://www.quora.com/With-no-apparent-consideration-from-the-user-how-can-the-user-service-agreement-for-a-site-like-Facebook-be-a-legally-binding-contract/answer/Jennifer-Ellis), Ellis wrote

>There is mutual consideration. Facebook allows people to use its site. That is the thing of value that the user is getting. Facebook benefits from people using its site. That is the value Facebook is getting.