Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Should Section 5 of the FTC Act be Amended to Add a Private Right of Action?
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Challenges of Using the Current Law to Address Dark Patterns, with Guest Gregory Dickinson, Assistant Professor, St. Thomas University
Webinar Recording: An Overview of the American Data Privacy and Protection Act
CF on Cyber: An Update on the Changes to the Florida Telemarketing Act
Last Thursday, the Seventh Circuit issued its fourth opinion in two years addressing Article III standing in the context of Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). The court handed the plaintiff in Thornley v....more
The companies Salesforce.com, Inc. and Hanna Andersson, LLC are on the receiving end of a novel lawsuit, which appears to be the very first data breach class action ever filed with alleged violations of the California...more
In Frank v. Gaos, the Supreme Court appeared poised to decide a divisive class action issue: whether settlement awards to third-party charities (known as cy pres awards) are valid. On March 20, however, an 8-1 majority...more
In Frank v. Gaos, plaintiff Paloma Goas brought a class action alleging that Google’s transmission of users’ search terms violated the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2701, et seq. (“SCA”). The SCA creates a private...more
In recent years, the use of biometrics in business has been growing. In the employment context, for example, some employers use biometric time clocks, which allow employees to “clock in” with a fingerprint or iris scan....more
California's Automatic Renewal Law (ARL), Business and Professions Code Section 17600 et seq., has been a new and potent weapon for the plaintiffs' bar in recent years. The ARL requires a business to clearly and conspicuously...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: U.S. Supreme Court: mere violation of a statute creating a private right of action is not itself sufficient to satisfy the standing requirement under Article III’s “case or controversy.” To establish...more
In a 6-2 decision, the United States Supreme Court on Monday sided with an online "people search engine" company, Spokeo.com ("Spokeo"), to provide critical insight as to when and how consumers can sue for privacy violations...more
Google has recently asked a California federal court to dismiss a proposed class action alleging that the company’s practice of scanning Gmail users e-mail for marketing data violates federal and state privacy laws, primarily...more
Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339 (SCOTUSBlog page). The question presented is “Whether Congress may confer Article III standing upon a plaintiff who suffers no concrete...more
The day is almost upon us. Halloween, you say? No, oral arguments in the Spokeo case. Way more exciting. Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins is important because it goes to the heart of when a claim for non-compliance can be brought...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339 (SCOTUSblog page), to decide whether a plaintiff who does not suffer any injury has Article III standing to sue for violation of a...more
In essence, the question presented in Spokeo is whether a statutory violation, without more, satisfies the injury requirements for Article III standing purposes. Should the Court rule in Spokeo, Inc.’s favor when it hears the...more
The United States Supreme Court has granted certiorari to decide whether a statutory violation alone, unaccompanied by any actual harm to the plaintiff, is sufficient to establish Article III standing. See Spokeo, Inc. v....more
The U.S. Supreme Court this week agreed to hear a highly watched privacy case which will have great significance in the rapidly changing area of privacy law....more
In an important move that may clarify standing in a variety of consumer cases, the U.S. Supreme Court on April 27, 2015 granted review in Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., 742 F.3d 409 (9th Cir. 2014), cert. granted, 135 S. Ct. 323...more
Since the Constitution was ratified, 226 years ago, potential plaintiffs have been required to first establish that they have a “case or controversy” before a court can consider the merits of any legal claim. As the U.S....more
Zombie or no-injury plaintiffs seeking to represent zombie or no-injury classes are on the rise. In these suits, plaintiff was not injured, and there’s no way to prove who, if anyone, in the class was. Thomas Robins is one of...more
The Supreme Court recently accepted review of one of the most talked about privacy class action and consumer cases of the past year, Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., No. 13-1339 (U.S.). The issue before the Court is whether Congress...more
On April 27, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Spokeo Inc. v. Robins, Case Number 13-1339. The issue raised by the certiorari petition was whether Congress may confer Article III standing upon a plaintiff who...more
The Supreme Court yesterday morning granted Spokeo, Inc.’s petition for a writ of certiorari in the closely watched case of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339. The case presents the question as to whether defendants can be...more
On April 27 the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, setting the stage for the high court to resolve a critical standing question that is an issue in almost all online privacy cases:...more