BALTIMORE — In a Feb. 15 reply brief supporting its summary judgment motion, the National Security Agency (NSA) tells a Maryland federal court that Wikimedia Foundation has failed to offer any admissible, nonprivileged evidence that any of its communications were intercepted in the agency’s upstream surveillance program, defeating its standing to bring constitutional claims against the government (Wikimedia Foundation v. National Security Agency, et al., No. 1:15-cv-00662, D. Md.).
SAN FRANCISCO— A technology firm that is the defendant in a patent infringement lawsuit failed to establish that producing emails of an employee in the United Kingdom would violate the privacy protections of Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), a California federal magistrate judge ruled Feb. 14, finding the requested emails to be relevant to the suit and the plaintiff’s requests to not be overbroad (Finjan Inc. v. Zscaler Inc., No. 3:17-cv-06946, N.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24570).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — Three months after a California federal judge preliminarily approved an $8.3 million settlement with Lenovo (United States) Inc. over its use of intrusive adware, a consumer class on Feb. 14 moved for final approval of the agreement that would settle their privacy and computer fraud claims against the computer manufacturer (In Re: Lenovo Adware Litigation, No. 3:15-md-02624, N.D. Calif.).
PITTSBURGH — A fast food chain has agreed to pay $50 million to settle financial institutions’ class claims against its franchisees in connection with a data breach first reported in 2016, according to a motion for preliminary settlement approval filed Feb. 13 in a Pennsylvania federal court (First Choice Federal Credit Union, et al. v. The Wendy’s Company, et al., No. 16-506, W.D. Pa.).
CHICAGO — A Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Feb. 12 dismissed, for lack of jurisdiction, a newspaper’s appeal of a trial court ruling that found it liable under the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act (DPPA) for publishing information about Chicago Police Department (CPD) officers that it obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), finding that the underlying judgment did not sufficiently address what relief was awarded to the prevailing officers (Hugh Gallagly, et al. v. Sun-Times Media LLC, No. 18-3101, 7th Cir.).
SAN FRANCISCO — In a Feb. 11 brief filed in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, Facebook Inc. responds to a motion to dismiss its appeal of a trial court’s certification of a class suing it for violation of an Illinois biometric privacy law, disputing the plaintiffs’ assertion that a recent Illinois Supreme Court ruling on the statute resolved the issues on appeal (In re Facebook Biometric Information Privacy Litigation, No. 18-15982, 9th Cir.).
NEW YORK — A New York federal judge on Feb. 12 declined to dismiss federal class claims against the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey alleging that it records medical exams of employees without their consent (Charlese Talarico, et al. v. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, No. 18-909, S.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22766).
FRESNO, Calif. — A California federal judge on Feb. 11 denied motions by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Washington Post to unseal court filings in a case where the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) reportedly sought to compel Facebook Inc. to provide it with access to users’ private calls made via the social network, with the judge concluding that the need to maintain confidentiality in crime fighting techniques outweighed any public right of access to the records (In re U.S. Department of Justice Motion to Compel Facebook to Provide Technical Assistance in Sealed Case, Opinion and Order Issued in or About September 2018, No. 1:18-mc-00057, E.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21931).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a pair of Feb. 5 rulings, a District of Columbia U.S. Court of Appeals panel upheld a trial court’s dismissal of three lawsuits over adomestic surveillance program of the National Security Agency (NSA), finding that the discontinuation of the program rendered most of the claims smoot (Larry Klayman, et al. v. Barack Obama, et al., Nos. 17-5281 and 17-5282, D.C. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3572; and Larry Klayman v. James B. Comey, et al., No. 18-5097, D.C. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3574).
PORTLAND, Ore. — Addressing motions to compel by both sides in a consolidated class action over a 2014 data breach experienced by Premera Blue Cross, an Oregon federal judge on Feb. 6 denied the health insurer’s request to inspect the computers and devices of the named plaintiffs, finding the request to be “not proportional to the needs of the case” and outweighed by the plaintiffs’ privacy interests (In Re: Premera Blue Cross Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 3:15-md-02633, D. Ore., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20279).
SAN FRANCISCO — A consolidated class complaint was filed against Facebook Inc. in California federal court Feb. 7, with plaintiffs alleging negligence and breach of contract related to a 2018 data breach that exposed the personal details of millions of the social network’s users through a vulnerability in the profile “View As” feature (Carl Echavarria, et al. v. Facebook Inc., No. 3:18-cv-05982, N.D. Calif.).
HOUSTON— Apple Inc. was hit with a negligence and products liability complaint Jan. 28, when a Texas man filed suit in Texas state court over the recently announced glitch in the FaceTime for iPhones that allowed users to eavesdrop on one another (Larry D. Williams II v. Apple Inc., et al., No. 2019-06645, Texas Dist., Harris Co.).
CHICAGO — One month after an Illinois federal judge dismissed their complaints against Google LLC under Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), two Chicago residents teamed up to file similar privacy claims over Google’s photo-tagging feature in Illinois state court on Jan. 24 (Lindabeth Rivera, et al. v. Google LLC, No. 2009CH00990, Ill. Cir., Cook Co.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPMDL) on Feb. 6 granted two motions to centralize 11 lawsuits against Marriott International Inc. in Maryland federal court, finding that common issues in the lawsuits over the hotel chain’s recently announced data breach made centralization appropriate and efficient (In re: Marriott International Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 2879, JPMDL).
SAN FRANCISCO — Facebook Inc.’s quest to dismiss a consolidated privacy class action over its data-sharing activities with Cambridge Analytica LLC stalled after a Feb. 1 hearing on its dismissal motion, when a California federal judge granted the plaintiffs’ request to file an amended complaint, thereby, he said, mooting the social network’s motion (In re Facebook Inc., Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, No. 3:18-md-2843, N.D. Calif.)
KANSAS CITY, Kan. — In what he called a “close question,” a Kansas federal judge on Feb. 1 found that the U.S. Constitution recognizes a right to informational privacy, leading him to deny a motion by the past and present Kansas secretaries of State to dismiss a putative class action alleging privacy violations over a program through which certain voter data was shared with other states (Scott Moore, et al. v. Kris Kobach, et al., No. 2:18-cv-02329, D. Kan., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16339).
OAKLAND, Calif. — The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) on Feb. 1 filed a reply brief in response to a California federal court’s order to show cause, arguing that a Federal Bureau of Investigation declaration should remain classified and inaccessible to Twitter Inc. in a lawsuit focusing on the social network’s quest to inform the public about its compelled role in the FBI’s surveillance program (Twitter Inc. v. Matthew G. Whitaker, et al., No. 4:14-cv-04480, N.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO — In a Jan. 31 pretrial order, a California federal judge in the consolidated privacy class action over Facebook Inc’s data-sharing activities with Cambridge Analytica LLC directed the parties “to pay special attention to” topics related to the plaintiffs’ purported consent to share their personal data with third parties and the social network’s disclosure of pertinent account settings (In re Facebook Inc., Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, No. 3:18-md-2843, N.D. Calif.).
PHILADELPHIA — One year after the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in a customer’s lawsuit against J. Crew Group Inc. under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA), the plaintiff on Jan. 29 filed a notice of supplemental authority, stating that a recent Illinois First District Appellate Court ruling supports his standing to sue the retailer for violating the statute’s receipt-printing guidelines without requiring evidence of additional harm (Ahmed Kamal v. J. Crew Group Inc., et al., No. 17-2345 and 17-2453, 3rd Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Concluding that most of the named plaintiffs suing their health insurance provider over a 2014 data breach failed to plead damages, a District of Columbia federal judge on Jan. 30 mostly dismissed their class claims for negligence, fraud and consumer protection against the insurer (Chantal Attias, et al. v. CareFirst Inc., et al., No. 1:15-cv-00882, D. D.C., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14387).