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.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — Five and a half months after preliminarily approving a settlement between Google LLC and a class of non-Gmail users, a California federal judge on Feb. 9 granted the plaintiffs’ motion for final approval of the settlement in which Google agrees to stop scanning emails sent to Gmail users (Daniel Matera, et al. v. Google LLC, No. 5:15-cv-04062, N.D. Calif.).
CHICAGO — A customer of Uber Technologies Ltd. on Feb. 5 filed a motion to stay his putative class action in Illinois federal court over the ride-sharing service’s 2016 data breach, in light of a pending motion to consolidate 18 such cases before the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPMDL) (Bradley West v. Uber USA LLC, et al., No. 1:17-cv-08593, N.D. Ill.).
CLEVELAND — An Ohio federal judge on Jan. 25 denied a motion to stay or transfer the second class complaint filed against Whole Foods Market Group Inc. over a data breach, finding that there is no overlap in the state law claims made in the two suits and that the case should proceed without interruption (Patricia Banus, et al. v. Whole Foods Market Group, Inc., No. 17-2132, N.D. Ohio, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12289).
PITTSBURGH — Employees of a Pennsylvania hospital whose personally identifiable information (PII) was stolen in a 2014 data breach argue in a Dec. 28 brief to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court that the state’s economic-loss doctrine does not bar their negligence claim against the hospital or related damages (Barbara A. Dittman, et al. v. UPMC, et al., No. 43 WAP 2017, Pa. Sup.).
SAN FRANCISCO — Plaintiffs claiming privacy and consumer violations against Toyota Motor Corp. and General Motors LLC (GM) failed allege any actual harm from the purported risk of vehicles’ computer components being hacked, a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Dec. 21, affirming dismissal of their putative class claims for lack of standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution (Helene Cahen, et al. v. Toyota Motor Corp., et al., No. 16-15496, 9th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 26261).
SAN FRANCISCO — The $3.89 million settlement of a class action over Facebook Inc.’s practice of scanning users’ private messages (PMs) is unfair, an objecting class member tells the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in a Jan. 25 brief seeking reversal of the settlement’s approval, because most of the award goes to class counsel rather than class members (Matthew Campbell, et al. v. Facebook Inc., et al., No. 17-16873, 9th Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals heard arguments about drone privacy on Jan. 25, with Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) debating whether the agency violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by not addressing privacy issues in its recent rule on drone safety (Electronic Privacy Information Center, et al. v. The Federal Aviation Administration, et al., No. 16-1297, D.C. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Arguing that an order denying requested injunctive relief against a presidential investigatory commission was mooted by its recent dissolution, a civil liberties organization argues in a Jan. 24 reply brief to the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that the order, in which a judge declined to enjoin the commission’s collection of voter data,, should be vacated and remanded for resolution of remaining issues (Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, et al., No. 17-5171, D.C. Cir.).
PHOENIX — Motel 6 Operating L.P. and G6 Hospitality LLC, doing business as Motel 6, maintain a policy of disclosing guest registration information to agents of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) without requiring a warrant or reasonable suspicion of criminal acidity in violation of the U.S. Constitution, federal civil rights statutes and Arizona statutes, several unnamed Latino guests allege in a class complaint filed Jan. 23 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona (Jane V., et al. v. Motel 6 Operating L.P., et al., No. 18-242, D. Ariz.).
ROCHESTER, N.Y. — In light of a Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling and newly submitted evidence suggesting potential criminal misuse of policyholders’ personally identifiable information (PII), which was stolen in a breach of their insurer’s network, a New York federal judge on Jan. 19 found that sufficient allegations of injury from the risk of future identity theft merited reconsideration of her previous decision to dismiss claims brought by some of the plaintiffs in a putative class action against the insurer (Matthew Fero, et al. v. Excellus Health Plan Inc., et al., No. 6:15-cv-06569, W.D. N.Y., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8999).
SEATTLE — Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson announced in a press release that the state sued Motel 6 on Jan. 3 in the King County Superior Court, alleging that the national hotel chain voluntarily provided guest lists to agents of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on a routine basis for at least two years (Washington v. Motel 6 Operating LP, Wash. Super., King Co.).
ORLANDO, Fla. — Customers suing over a 2015/2016 data breach at fast food franchises have proposed class definitions that are “fundamentally flawed,” have failed to show that there is common evidence and haven’t proven any risk of future harm, Wendy’s International LLC argues in its opposition to a motion for class certification filed Jan. 16 in a Florida federal court (Jonathan Torres, et al. v. Wendy’s International, LLC, No. 16-210, M.D. Fla.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 22 denied a petition for certiorari filed by an online data aggregator seeking review of a follow-up question related to standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution that it claimed was not resolved in a 2016 ruling by the Supreme Court in the same case (Spokeo Inc. v. Thomas Robins, No. 17-806, U.S. Sup.).
HARTFORD, Conn. — A Connecticut trial court erred when it ruled for a health care provider, finding that it did not owe its patient a common-law duty of confidentiality when responding to a subpoena, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Jan. 16 (Emily Byrne v. Avery Center for Obstetrics and Gynecology, P.C., SC 19873, Conn. Sup., 2018 Conn. LEXIS 20).
PHILADELPHIA — Aetna Inc. and related entities (Aetna, collectively) have agreed to pay $17,161,200 to settle privacy claims by more than 13,400 class members whose HIV status was revealed by the insurer through an indiscreet mailing, according to a motion for preliminary approval of a class action settlement filed Jan. 16 (Andrew Beckett, et al. v. Aetna, Inc., et al., No. 17-3864, E.D. Pa.).