SAN JOSE, Calif. — In her second ruling addressing a motion by Yahoo! Inc. to dismiss a putative class action over data breaches that exposed users’ personally identifiable information (PII), a California federal judge on March 9 deemed most of the claims sufficiently alleged, while partly dismissing unfair competition, customer records and punitive damages claims (In re: Yahoo! Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 5:16-md-02752, N.D. Calif.).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Home Depot U.S.A. has agreed to pay $27.8 million to resolve allegation brought by the state of California that it violated the Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL) and California’s unfair competition law (UCL) by illegally storing and disposing of hazardous wastes at its stores and facilities, according to a March 7 filing in California state court (California v. Home Depot U.S.A., No. RG18893251, Calif. Super., Alameda Co.).
SAN FRANCISCO — Reversing a trial court’s dismissal order, a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on March 8 found that customers of Zappos.com Inc. have standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution to sue the online retailer over a 2012 data breach based on the risk of identity theft from the exposure of their personally identifiable information (PII) (In re Zappos.com Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 16-16860, 9th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 5841).
CHICAGO — An Illinois federal judge on March 5 dismissed the federal claim brought by two fitness phone application users in a class complaint over unauthorized collection of their data, narrowed their state claim and recommended two possible alternative federal statutes under which the plaintiffs could file a claim (Jessica Vasil, et al. v. Kiip, Inc., No. 16-9937, N.D. Ill., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35573).
SAN FRANCISCO — In a March 6 stipulation filed in California federal court, Google LLC and a putative class announced that they have preliminarily settled privacy claims related to personal payload data collected during Google’s Street View photographing efforts, informing the court that a preliminary settlement agreement would be forthcoming (In re Google LLC Street View Electronic Communications Litigation, No. 3:10-md-02184, N.D. Calif.).
PHILADELPHIA — Pennsylvania Attorney General (AG) Josh Shapiro on March 5 filed suit against Uber Technologies Inc. in Pennsylvania state court, alleging violation of state consumer protection and notification laws in the ride-sharing service’s yearlong delay in informing its drivers in the commonwealth about a 2016 data breach that exposed their personally identifiable information (PII) (Pennsylvania v. Uber Technologies Inc., No. NA, Pa. Comm. Pls., Philadelphia Co.).
BLUEFIELD, W.Va. — A businessowners liability insurer on Feb. 12 moved for judgment on the pleadings in its declaratory judgment lawsuit challenging coverage for seven lawsuits alleging that the insured's employee filed fraudulent tax returns (Ohio Security Insurance Co. v. K R Enterprises, Inc., et al., No. 15-16264, S.D. W.Va.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Feb. 27 from the U.S. government and Microsoft Corp. as to whether a warrant issued under Section 2703 of the Stored Communications Act (SCA) can compel disclosure of data that is stored in overseas servers (United States v. Microsoft Corp., No. 17-2, U.S. Sup.).
SAN FRANCISCO — The plaintiffs in a putative class action alleging violations of Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) by Facebook Inc. sufficiently alleged concrete injury under the statute, a California federal judge ruled Feb. 26, denying the social network’s motion to dismiss for what it called the plaintiffs’ failure to allege real world harm (In re Facebook Biometric Information Privacy Litigation, No. 3:15-cv-03747, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30727).
SEATTLE — A Washington federal judge on Feb. 12 granted a motion jointly filed by both parties to seal the entire administrative record of a disability insurance dispute, finding that the plaintiff’s right to medical privacy and the inability to redact portions of the record outweigh the public’s right to access the information (David Alan Anderson v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America, No. C17-0659-JCC, W.D. Wash., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22661).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Feb. 20 brief opposing certiorari, the siblings of a deceased Massachusetts man tell the U.S. Supreme Court that a state court ruling ordering the disclosure of the contents of their brother’s Yahoo email account does not run afoul of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) and creates no questions or conflicts meriting high court review (Oath Holdings Inc. v. Marianne Ajemian, et al., No. 17-1005, U.S. Sup.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — Plaintiffs alleging negligence by Intuit Inc. related to incidents of fraudulent tax return filings were denied the opportunity to pursue an interlocutory appeal of an order compelling arbitration on Feb. 16, when a California federal judge concluded that an appeal would not serve to advance resolution of the case (In re Intuit Data Litigation, No. 5:15-cv-01778, N.D. Calif.).
CINCINNATI — A federal judge in Kentucky erred when dismissing a count from an indictment charging a pharmacist with aggravated identity theft, a Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Feb. 20, finding that the defendant used the identities of a doctor and patient for the purpose of submitting a fraudulent claim to an insurance company (United States of America v. Philip E. Michael II, No. 17-5626, 6th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 3918).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In its Feb. 20 order list, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari by a health insurer that argued that the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals did not apply the proper actual or imminent harm standing in determining class members’ standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution related to the exposure of their personally identifiable information (PII) in a 2014 data breach (CareFirst Inc., et al. v. Chantal Attias, et al., No. 17-641, U.S. Sup., 2018 U.S. LEXIS 1356).
ATLANTA — In a Feb. 16 brief to the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, a group of financial institutions (FIs) that achieved a successful settlement of their claims related to the 2014 Home Depot Inc. data breach oppose the home improvement chain’s appeal of a subsequent $15.3 million attorney fees award, calling the amount reasonably calculated and in line with the efforts undertaken by class counsel (Northeastern Engineers Federal, et al. v. Home Depot Inc., et al., No. 17-14741, 11th Cir.).
PHOENIX — Granting a joint discovery resolution motion filed by the parties in a wrongful termination suit, an Arizona federal magistrate judge on Feb. 14 found that an employee who was purportedly terminated for whistleblowing related to data breaches experienced by his former employer was entitled to conduct discovery into why documents related to lawsuits over those breaches were designated as confidential (Miguel Corzo v. Maricopa County Community College District, et al., No. 2:15-cv-02552, D. Ariz.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — With oral arguments approaching on Feb. 27, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a reply brief on behalf of the federal government with the U.S. Supreme Court Feb. 12, arguing that the presumption against extraterritoriality does not prevent Microsoft Corp. from producing foreign-stored emails under a Stored Communications Act (SCA) warrant because the firm’s compliance with the warrant would occur domestically (United States v. Microsoft Corp., No. 17-2, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Feb. 12 reply brief, a man convicted of firearms violations asks the U.S. Supreme Court to review whether law enforcement’s use of a device called a cell-site simulator to track his location violated his Fourth Amendment rights (Damian Patrick v. United States, No. 17-6256, U.S. Sup.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — The city of Providence, R.I., on Feb. 12 filed a consumer protection class action complaint against Intel Corp. in California federal court, charging the microprocessor chip manufacturer with unfair competition and warranty violations related to the recently discovered “Meltdown” and “Spectre” security vulnerabilities that can reportedly affect millions of computers and devices worldwide, resulting in the exposure of users’ sensitive information (Providence v. Intel Corp., No. 5:18-cv-00894, N.D. Calif.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — Arguing in a Feb. 9 brief that they sufficiently alleged such elements as reliance, damages and unconscionability, the lead plaintiffs in a consolidated lawsuit over data breaches experienced by Yahoo Inc. oppose the internet firm’s motion to dismiss in California federal court (In re: Yahoo! Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 5:16-md-02752, N.D. Calif.).