They did comment on something else than venue, though (page 12): We also note that in order to be guilty of accessing “without authorization, or in excess of

They did comment on something else than venue, though (page 12): We also note that in order to be guilty of accessing “without authorization, or in excess of authorization” under New Jersey law, the Government needed to prove that Auernheimer or Spitler circumvented a code- or password-based barrier to access [..] The account slurper simply accessed the publicly facing portion of the login screen and scraped information that AT&T unintentionally published (If NJ law demands breaking a password, that seems to run counter to the idea they picked NJ for its law, or was that concerning some other charge?)