Andrew and Tristan Tate v. TikTok Account Removal Complaint
This exhibit contains the complaint filed by Emory Andrew Tate III and Tristan Tate against TikTok, Inc. It presents the plaintiffs' account-removal allegations, twelve asserted causes of action, requested damages and other relief, signed verifications, and attached TikTok terms and community-guideline materials.
Read with context. This preserved document reflects its source and publication date. Check the linked source context page for corrections, replacements, or later developments.
If the PDF does not display in your browser, download the original file.
About this document
A plain-language guide to the contents and context of this specific court or DOJ document.
What the TikTok filing contains
The PDF is labeled Exhibit A and includes a California state-court complaint by Emory Andrew Tate III and Tristan Tate against TikTok, Inc. The complaint's caption identifies twelve asserted causes of action, including breach of contract, a California unfair-competition claim, tortious interference, unjust enrichment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, an Unruh Civil Rights Act claim, misrepresentation, promissory estoppel, fraud, a Section 1983 claim, and false light. The complaint also demands a jury trial. After the complaint and its two signed verifications, the PDF includes exhibits containing TikTok terms and community-guideline materials.
Supported by PDF pages 1, 2, 20, 21, 22, 23The plaintiffs' account-removal allegations
The plaintiffs allege that TikTok removed both of their accounts without prior notice, a meaningful explanation, or an opportunity to appeal. They identify the handles @cobratate, @CobraTate_Official, and @tristantate07 and describe their business model as dependent on social-media engagement and reach. The complaint says TikTok's terms of service and community guidelines governed the parties' relationship. It quotes guideline language stating that users are notified of content-removal decisions and can appeal when they believe no violation occurred. These statements are allegations made by the plaintiffs in their complaint; the exhibit does not establish that a court accepted them as fact.
Supported by PDF pages 5, 6, 7, 8Claims and relief requested in the complaint
The complaint organizes its legal theories into twelve causes of action. In the breach-of-contract count, the plaintiffs allege that TikTok failed to follow its terms and guidelines when it removed their accounts without notice, appeal, or consistent standards, and they claim damages exceeding $10 million. Other counts address alleged unfair business practices and interference with business relationships. In the prayer for relief, the plaintiffs request compensatory damages exceeding $50 million, punitive and exemplary damages in an amount to be determined at trial, costs, attorney's fees, interest, and any other relief the court considers proper. Those figures are amounts requested by the plaintiffs, not damages awarded by a court.
Supported by PDF pages 2, 9, 10, 11, 19How to read and verify this court exhibit
The complaint is dated August 8, 2025, and is signed by counsel for the plaintiffs. Separate verification pages bear the names of Emory Andrew Tate III and Tristan Tate and state that each had read the complaint, knew its contents from personal knowledge except for matters alleged on information and belief, and believed those matters to be true. The attached terms include language reserving TikTok's right to remove or disable access to content at its discretion. The complaint and attachments therefore record competing materials and the plaintiffs' requested relief; they are not a judicial decision on liability or damages.
Supported by PDF pages 19, 20, 21, 22, 28Document record
- Document type
- Court exhibit
- Category
- Civil
- Publication date
- 2025-08-20
- DOJ office
- Not stated by source
- Case number
- 2:25-cv-07834
- Collected
- 2026-11-13
- Original filename
- gov.uscourts.cacd.983782.1.2.pdf
Source & integrity
This copy is preserved from the linked source record. The fingerprint below lets you verify that the bytes have not changed.
303dfe60a908fbdcf3aab78db6c82b554f13b2211dec717f9afe6e1219726994ShareIt.onl is an independent public-document index and is not affiliated with the U.S. Department of Justice or CourtListener. The linked source record remains authoritative.