Litigation

Last week, the Third Circuit affirmed dismissal of a putative class action asserting that defendant Quest Diagnostics violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”) and the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (“CMIA”) by employing a website pixel to track and collect data about their website activity for advertising purposes.

Continue Reading Third Circuit Affirms Dismissal of CIPA and CMIA Claims

In a win for businesses using third-party technologies to power their websites, a California federal court applied the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Popa v. Microsoft Corporation to dismiss a “pen register” claim brought under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”) for lack of Article III standing.  Khamooshi v. Politico LLC, No. 24-cv-07836-SK, 2025 WL 2822879 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 2, 2025).  “As in Popa,” the Khamooshi court held that the plaintiffs—who alleged the collection of their device type, browser type, and “device fingerprints”—“identifie[d] no embarrassing, invasive, or otherwise private information collected,” as required to establish an Article III injury. Continue Reading Court Applies Popa to Dismiss CIPA Pen Register Claim for Lack of Article III Standing

In Nicole Pileggi v. Washington Newspaper Publishing Company LLC, the D.C. Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court’s dismissal of a complaint alleging that news magazine and website Washington Examiner disclosed consumers’ personal information through a third-party pixel in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act (“VPPA”). Continue Reading D.C. Circuit Deepens Circuit Split on Interpretation of “Consumer” Under VPPA

Last month, the D.C. Circuit in In re: Sealed Case, 2025 WL 2013687 (D.C. Cir. July 18, 2025) invalidated a non-disclosure order (“NDO”) that applied to prospectively issued subpoenas, holding that it failed to meet the statutory requirements in 18 U.S.C. § 2705(b) of the Stored Communications Act.  Continue Reading Federal Court Invalidates Prospective Blanket NDO

A U.S. District Court recently denied a government application for an administrative inspection warrant to enter a private business for the purpose of searching for and seizing undocumented immigrants and investigating a pattern or practice of employing unauthorized aliens (sometimes referred to as a “Blackie’s” warrant after a seminal case, discussed below).  Unlike a criminal search warrant, administrative inspection warrants may allow a government agency to search a premises for a civil administrative purpose (as opposed to a criminal investigation) and may generally be issued pursuant to a less rigorous standard as compared to criminal search warrants.  In In re Sealed Search Warrant Application, the court rejected the government’s efforts to obtain an administrative inspection warrant rather than a criminal search warrant, reasoning that it could not issue an administrative inspection warrant in the context of a workplace immigration raid based on a lesser showing than that required for criminal search warrants under the Fourth Amendment.  No. CV 3:25-MC-05067, 2025 WL 1499054 (S.D. Tex. May 27, 2025). Continue Reading US District Court for the Southern District of Texas Denies Use of Administrative Inspection Warrant for Worksite Immigration Enforcement

Health-related websites are increasingly targeted with wiretapping suits if they use pixels or other third-party technologies to power their websites.  A few months ago, a California court dismissed on multiple grounds one such suit challenging the use of website pixels by Clearblue, a company that offers home pregnancy and fertility test kits.  Saedi v. SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics d/b/a Clearblue, 2025 WL 1141168 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 27, 2025). Continue Reading Home Pregnancy Test Company Wins Dismissal of Pixel Wiretapping Suit