After Illinois Biometric Decision, Plaintiffs Urge 9th Circuit to Tee Up Facebook Case for Trial
They claim the social media site's "tag suggestions" feature violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act.
January 31, 2019 at 07:10 PM
2 minute read
Plaintiffs lawyers pursuing a privacy class action lawsuit against Facebook Inc. are pointing to a recent decision by the Illinois Supreme Court to try to get their case back on course for trial.
Lawyers representing a class of Illinois Facebook users were scheduled to go to trial in July 2018 before U.S. District Judge James Donato on claims that the social media site's “tag suggestions” feature violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. The state law restricts how companies in Illinois collect and store biometric identifiers such as fingerprints and facial recognition data.
But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in May granted Facebook's emergency request to review Donato's class certification order in the case, putting the brakes on trial.
In court papers filed with the Ninth Circuit on Thursday, plaintiffs lawyers from three firms—Edelson, Labaton Sucharow and Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd—claim a recent decision from the Illinois Supreme Court “fully and decisively rejected” Facebook's position in the appeal. Facebook's lawyers at Mayer Brown have argued that plaintiffs had to show actual harm beyond a statutory violation to establish standing under BIPA.
On Jan. 25, the Illinois Supreme Court held in Rosenbach v. Six Flags Entertainment Corp. greed that the state legislature didn't require plaintiffs to allege any harm beyond a statutory violation in order to be considered an “aggrieved party” with standing to sue under the law. The Illinois high court's decision overturned a lower appellate court decision that Donato had largely distinguished from the Facebook case in his class certification order.
Donato in his April 2018 order noted that Facebook's lawyers at Mayer Brown put great emphasis on their argument that not all class members qualified as “aggrieved” parties under BIPA. Donato, however, wrote that Facebook's lawyers “almost exclusively” relied on the December 2017 decision from the Second District Appellate Court of Illinois—a decision recently overturned by the state's high court.
A Facebook representative declined to comment.
Edelson's Rafey Balabanian wasn't immediately available for comment Thursday afternoon.
This content has been archived.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 AllSchools Win Again: Social Media Fails to Strike Public Nuisance Claims
5 minute readElon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
'The Front Line of Regulating AI': Manatt's Brandon Reilly on CPPA's Move to Adopt New Data Broker and AI Rules
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-61
- 2Decision of the Day: School District's Probe Was a 'Sham'; Title IX Administrator Showed Sex-Based Bias
- 3US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 4Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
- 5McCormick Consolidates Two Tesla Chancery Cases
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