Episode 345 -- Raytheon Pays $950 Million to Resolve Fraud, FCPA, ITAR and False Claims Act Violations
The ‘Long Arm’ of CIPA and Its Newfound Pen-Trap Claims
Episode 119 -- The Ericsson FCPA Settlement
Federal and state antitrust enforcers, as well as private plaintiffs, are actively investigating and challenging both the companies using pricing algorithms, and the software vendors or the data analytics firms providing the...more
Suppose that the central issue in a putative class action is a legal issue pending before the Supreme Court. Depending on how the Supreme Court rules, the plaintiffs will recover either nothing or up to $600 million. But...more
This post is part of a series of articles we are doing on 2023 data protection litigation trends. Since its enactment in 2008, Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) has produced a wave of privacy-related...more
The Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) has proven to be a significant burden on Illinois employers, and a recent Illinois federal court decision may have made the legal landscape even more difficult. In Cothron...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: “Objector blackmail” occurs in the class settlement approval process when a few class members object to a proposed settlement and, after the district court has overruled their objections, pursue appeals...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Illinois Supreme Court recently affirmed a state appellate court’s holding that in class action lawsuits, an effective tender made before a named plaintiff files a class certification motion satisfies...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The second key trend from our 16th Annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report involves rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court. Over the past few years, the Supreme Court has issued a number of rulings that...more
In an important opinion, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a lower court’s ruling that plaintiffs in the ongoing Facebook biometric privacy class action have alleged a concrete injury-in-fact to confer Article III standing and that...more
The Third Circuit recently held that procedural violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (“FACTA”), absent any showing of concrete harm, do not meet Article III standing requirements. Kamal v. J. Crew...more
In a precedential opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit concluded that because the named plaintiff in a class action complaint failed to allege a concrete injury...more
On September 10, 2018, in Long v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit joined the chorus of recent circuit court opinions tackling the question of...more
Spokeo v. Robins – which confirmed that a plaintiff’s allegation of a defendant’s statutory violation without accompanying concrete harm fails to satisfy Article III’s “case or controversy” requirement – has brought the issue...more
Class action litigation is a rapidly developing area of the law. Here are the top five trends to keep an eye on as we approach the new year...more
In Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, the Supreme Court clarified the requirements necessary for plaintiffs to establish standing. The Court held that an allegation of a statutory violation, without some showing of concrete harm, is...more