Money. Identity. Technology.
Follow the money. Find the decision.
Payment restrictions
eGumball sought emergency delisting relief. The 2023 appeal reversed that provisional relief; the 2025 appeal rejected anti-SLAPP protection at its first step. FilmOn supplied an expressly applied legal framework.
Solid lines: documented in a cited record. Dashed: reported or inferred. Hollow arrows: proposed powers. Choose a connection for its evidence.
The rulings do not establish merchant liability, actual delisting or new processing access. The May 2025 modifying order corrects an inverted sentence without changing judgment. Current MATCH rules are a separate source period.
Merrick Bank Corporation → reported eGumball after termination → Mastercard MATCH Pro
2021 dispute
The appellate record describes Merrick's termination and MATCH listing of eGumball; its record showed Merrick alone could request this listing's addition/removal. Accuracy and final remedy remain unresolved.
eGumball, Inc. → sought provisional delisting relief → Orange County Superior Court — eGumball case
2021
Court record describes a merchant challenge seeking removal; damages and wrongdoing allegations are not adopted as findings.
Orange County Superior Court — eGumball case → ordered removal requests in provisional TRO → Merrick Bank Corporation
2021-11-03 – 2021-11-03
3November2021 TRO required Merrick, Paysafe and Visa to request removal; its mandatory portion was stayed on appeal and later reversed. No performed delisting or processing restoration is proved.
California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Three → reversed emergency mandatory relief → eGumball G060853 emergency-relief appeal
2023-05-17 – 2023-05-17
17May2023 appeal reversed for insufficient showing of required interim harm before a preliminary-injunction hearing, expressly reserving merits. Delisting alone would still need another acquirer's admission decision.
Merrick Bank Corporation → sought anti-SLAPP protection for MATCH report → eGumball G062863M anti-SLAPP appeal
2025 appeal
Merrick appealed denial of its special motion to strike; the2025 decision addresses procedural protected activity, not final truth or contract defenses.
California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Three → affirmed denial at protected-activity step → eGumball G062863M anti-SLAPP appeal
2025-04-23 – 2025-04-23
Court found this confidential commercial report did not contribute to public discussion under425.16(e)(4), while rejecting a categorical exclusion of all confidential commercial speech. Conversion was outside the motion; liability and privilege/contract defenses remain unadjudicated.
California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Three → modified inverted sentence without changing judgment → eGumball G062863M anti-SLAPP appeal
2025-05-06 – 2025-05-06
6May order substitutes eGumball's assertion that processed2020/2021 transactions were directly connected to written contracts; the contrary unmodified sentence is superseded. Rehearing denied, no judgment change; the assertion is not an adjudicated fact.
California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Three → ordered revised public redacted brief → eGumball, Inc.
2025-04-23 – 2025-04-23
Disposition ordered an updated public brief within10days concerning28specified documents while partly permitting sealing without prejudice. No actual revised filing, exhibit contents or resulting remedy acquired.
FilmOn S244157 public-interest anti-SLAPP decision → supplied expressly applied legal framework → eGumball G062863M anti-SLAPP appeal
2025-04-23 – 2025-04-23
2025 eGumball opinion expressly applies FilmOn's audience/purpose/context analysis to confidential payment reporting. This is a judicial-precedent route, not shared ownership, classifier or database.