No. 23-3304 ___________________________

Ann Jones, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Bloomingdales.com, LLC

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee ___________________________

No. 23-3606 ___________________________ Ann Jones, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; Jane Tenzer, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs - Appellants

v.

Papa John's International, Inc.

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee ____________

Appeals from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis ____________

Submitted: November 20, 2024 Filed: December 24, 2024 ____________ Before SHEPHERD, ARNOLD, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. ____________ ARNOLD, Circuit Judge.

After Ann Jones learned that two websites she had visited had permitted others to record her electronic communications with the sites, she brought separate actions against the websites' owners for invading her privacy. In one case, the district court1 dismissed her complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because she did not adequately plead that she had suffered a concrete injury. In the other case, the district court2 dismissed her complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. She appeals both dismissals. (We consolidated the appeals for oral argument and now resolve them in a single opinion.) Since we believe that Jones hasn't plausibly alleged a concrete injury in either case, we affirm the judgments.

Jones filed her lawsuits against Bloomingdales.com, LLC, and Papa John's International, Inc., on behalf of herself and a putative class of similarly situated people. (Another plaintiff named Jane Tenzer joined her suit against Papa John's, but we will call the plaintiffs "Jones" to keep things simple.) The allegations in each suit, which at this stage we accept as true, see Carlsen v. GameStop, Inc., 833 F.3d 903, 908 (8th Cir. 2016), are alike in all material respects. Jones alleges that she visited the companies' websites and, unbeknownst to her, they employed "session replay" technology that allowed them to discern and record things like her "mouse movements, clicks, keystrokes (such as text being entered into an information field or text box), search terms, URLs of web pages visited, as well as . . . what [she] searched for, what [she] looked at, the information [she] inputted, and what [she] clicked on." She says that this technology compiles what "is essentially a video of

1 The Honorable Sarah E. Pitlyk, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. 2 The Honorable Stephen R. Clark, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

-2- [her] entire visit" that can be replayed any time. According to Jones, companies like Bloomingdales and Papa John's use session-replay technology to improve their websites and to provide targeted advertisements.

To implement session-replay technology on their websites, the companies employed the assistance of third parties that we will call "providers." Using their session-replay programs, these providers allegedly can create unique "fingerprints" of individual users using information obtained from a user's visit to any website that the provider monitors. And, Jones asserts, if a user identifies herself (such as by inputtin