Seyfarth Launches Biometric Privacy Practice, Citing Growing Risks
Clients are looking for advice on compliance and also facing a growing number of class action lawsuits, said practice leader Karla Grossenbacher.
May 16, 2019 at 01:28 PM
3 minute read
Seyfarth & Shaw became the latest firm to launch a dedicated biometric privacy practice group on Monday, coincidentally, the same day that San Francisco authorities passed a bill to ban the use of facial recognition technology in surveillance by local agencies.
The practice group, composed of over 25 attorneys from such areas as litigation, labor and employment and policy, will be led by labor and employment attorneys Karla Grossenbacher and Thomas Ahlering.
“We're seeing more of a demand for both compliance advice and getting more clients who are served with biometric litigation of all kinds,” Grossenbacher said.
Chicago-based Seyfarth was one of the first law firms to defend an employer in a lawsuit asserting violations under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. That 2008 law, which made Illinois the first state to regulate the collection of biometric information, has led to a surge in litigation, as it is the only law that allows private individuals to file a lawsuit for damages stemming from a violation.
After the Illinois Supreme Court ruled in January that an alleged violation of BIPA alone is sufficient for standing under Illinois law, practitioners expect to see even more activity in the area.
The firm aims to advise clients in three separate areas: compliance, class action litigation, and lobbying.
For the first category, Seyfarth aims to counsel clients on navigating the patchwork of state laws that govern the use of biometric data. One component involves crafting workplace policies and procedures that comply with these varied legislative obligations over biometric data collection and storage.
The firm also seeks to help clients ward off potential biometric class action litigation.
“There are lots of procedural defenses to these cases, especially on the class action level, and we're always looking for the best way to defend our clients in these cases,” Grossenbacher said.
And Seyfarth will also monitor proposed and existing biometric legislation and push for the interests of its clients. However, don't expect to see anything at the federal level anytime soon, Grossenbacher cautioned. She also practices in the data breach arena, and despite the rapid advance of technology, national legislation on that subject has yet to advance beyond the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986.
Other firms building out their biometric privacy practices in recent months include Shook, Hardy & Bacon, which in February hired a pair of lawyers who previously led Baker & Hostetler's BIPA practice, and Chicago's Hahn Loeser & Parks, which opened a new practice group in March.
➤➤ Want to read more about how new tech is challenging old laws and changing the legal profession? Sign up for What's Next, a weekly email on the future of law.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllQuinn Emanuel Has Thrived in China. Will Trump Help Boost Its Fortunes?
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250