Company: MTCH
Filing Date: 2025-11-05
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0000891103-25-000180
Chunk: 9

Company: Match Group, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-11-05
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part II, Item 1
Chunk 9
---
Item 1.  Legal Proceedings

Overview

We are, and from time to time may become, involved in various legal proceedings arising in the normal course of our business activities, such as trademark and patent infringement claims, trademark oppositions, and consumer or advertising complaints, as well as stockholder derivative actions, class action lawsuits, mass arbitrations, and other matters. The amounts that may be recovered in such matters may be subject to insurance coverage. The litigation matters described below involve issues or claims that may be of particular interest to our stockholders, regardless of whether any of these matters may be material to our financial position or operations based upon the standard set forth in the SEC’s rules.

Pursuant to the Transaction Agreement, entered into in connection with our separation from IAC/InterActiveCorp, now known as IAC Inc. (“IAC”), we have agreed to indemnify IAC for matters relating to any business of Former Match Group, including indemnifying IAC for costs related to the matters described below other than the matter described under the heading “Newman Derivative and Stockholder Class Action Regarding Separation Transaction”.

The official names of legal proceedings in the descriptions below (shown in italics) reflect the original names of the parties when the proceedings were filed as opposed to the current names of the parties following the separation of Match Group and IAC.

Consumer Class Action Litigation Challenging Tinder’s Age-Tiered Pricing

On May 28, 2015, a putative state-wide class action was filed against Tinder in state court in California. See Allan Candelore v. Tinder, Inc., No. BC583162 (Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles). The complaint principally alleges that Tinder violated California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act by offering and charging users over a certain age a higher price than younger users for subscriptions to its premium Tinder Plus service. Plaintiff seeks damages in an unspecified amount. On July 15, 2024, the court granted Plaintiff’s motion to certify a class based upon California Tinder Plus and Tinder Gold subscribers age 29 and over. On January 17, 2025, the court denied our motion to compel the class and the plaintiff to arbitration. We filed a Notice of Appeal on January 24, 2025, and on April 18, 2025, the court stayed the case pending our appeal. On September 10, 2025, the parties agreed to settle the case on a class-wide basis for a payment of $60.