In Carlsen v. GameStop, Inc., No. 15-2453 (8th Cir. Aug. 16, 2016), the Eighth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Carlsen’s complaint, not for lack of standing, but for failing to state a claim. The Court found that Carlsen’s allegation that he suffered damages “in the form of devaluation of his Game Informer subscription in an amount equal to the difference between the value of the subscription that he paid for and the value of the subscription that he received, i.e., a subscription with compromised privacy protection,” constituted an “actual” injury. Carlsen, at *7. In addition, the Court also found that “Carlsen’s allegation that he did not receive data protection set forth in GameStop’s policies” was sufficient to establish standing for his unjust enrichment claim. Id.