United States v. Rosenow
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
33 F.4th 529, 2022 WL 1233236 (2022)
- Written by Tiffany Hester, JD
Facts
In its terms of service, Yahoo, an electronic messaging provider, stated that it stored all user communications and shared communications for criminal investigations and when otherwise required by law. Carsten Igor Rosenow (defendant) used Yahoo’s services to communicate with and buy child sex services from human traffickers in the Philippines. Yahoo learned about Rosenow’s activities and told the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The FBI then asked Yahoo to preserve Rosenow’s private communications related to Rosenow’s sex trafficking, pursuant to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which requires electronic communication service providers (ESP) to comply with government requests to preserve electronic evidence in the ESP’s possession pending a legal process. Yahoo complied. Eventually, the FBI obtained a search warrant for Rosenow’s electronic devices, which revealed evidence of Rosenow’s child sex-trafficking activity. The United States indicted and convicted Rosenow for attempted child sexual exploitation and child-pornography possession. Rosenow appealed, arguing that the FBI’s preservation request to Yahoo was an unreasonable seizure of Rosenow’s property in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Forrest, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

