As businesses increasingly deploy AI-powered call centers to streamline customer service, plaintiffs have turned to decades-old wiretapping laws to challenge these tools. In a recent decision, however, an Illinois federal district court held that use of an AI call analysis platform without caller consent does not violate the federal Wiretap Act because it falls within
Inside Class Actions Blogs
Latest from Inside Class Actions
A Closer Look: The Discoverability of Artificial Intelligence Prompts
Are AI prompts, and their generative outputs, discoverable in litigation? A handful of recent district court cases suggest the answer depends on whether the AI prompts and outputs constitute attorney work product.
In Tremblay v. OpenAI, Inc., 2024 WL 3748003 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2024), the court held that AI prompts written by lawyers can
Ninth Circuit Partially Reverses Certification of Classes Challenging Ford Trucks’ Alleged Steering “Shimmy”
The Ninth Circuit partially reversed an order certifying multiple state‑law classes in litigation alleging that certain Ford Super Duty trucks suffer from a steering defect. See Lessin et al. v. Ford Motor Co., No. 25‑2211 (9th Cir. Feb. 11, 2026). While the Ninth Circuit affirmed parts of the class certification order, it held that the
Fourth Circuit Announces Legal Framework for Pre-Discovery Motions to Deny Class Certification
Although an uncommon step, defendants in putative class actions in some jurisdictions may move to deny class certification before discovery begins if the complaint’s proposed class is facially deficient. A successful motion forces plaintiffs to proceed individually, reducing a defendant’s exposure and eliminating costly discovery into issues of class certification. But district courts have yet
Sanctions Order in Website Wiretapping Suit Reinforces Importance of Early Fact Investigation
In an effort to overcome hurdles to Article III standing, many website wiretapping suits today accuse businesses of unlawfully sharing sensitive health or financial data with third parties. However, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b) requires plaintiffs’ lawyers to ensure that these “factual contentions” in a complaint “have evidentiary support.” A California federal judge
Ninth Circuit Declines to Enforce “Misleading,” “Disparaging,” and “Confusing” Arbitration Agreement Mid‑Litigation
The Ninth Circuit sent a strong message to companies considering relying on arbitration agreements introduced mid-litigation to defeat class-action litigation. Avery v. TEKsystems, Inc., __ F.4th __, 2026 WL 218992 (9th Cir. Jan. 28, 2026)—in which the court described the defendant’s communications as “misleading,” “harmful,” “contradictory,” “disparaging,” and “inaccurate”—confirms the authority of district courts to refuse to
Pennsylvania Federal Court Dismisses Wiretapping Claims Against Health Insurer
Last week, a judge in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismissed a putative class’s wiretapping claims against health insurer Cigna. Adair v. Cigna Corporate Services, LLC, 2026 WL 295744 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 4, 2026). Five plaintiffs alleged that Cigna traded insureds’ privacy for commercial gain by embedding third-party tracking tools throughout its website and member
California Court Dismisses Wiretapping Claims Regarding Retailer’s Website Chat Feature on Summary Judgment
In a recent decision from the Superior Court of California for Los Angeles County, Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl granted summary judgment and dismissed a putative class action alleging that an online retailer, I Am Beyond d/b/a Beyond Yoga, had aided and abetted violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”). The Court concluded that
Website Wiretapping Roundup: 2025 Decisions and Developments
In 2025, courts continued to issue significant decisions concerning the application of wiretap and privacy laws to pixels, session replay, and other website technologies. Over the past year, we have featured posts discussing claims regarding website analytics and advertising tools brought under the federal Wiretap Act, the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”), the Video Privacy Protection Act
Arbitrator Rejects Website Wiretapping Claims After Hearing
In a recently published award, an arbitrator rejected claims that Dick’s Sporting Goods, Inc. (“Dick’s”) violated the Federal Wiretap Act and the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”) by purportedly installing website analytics and marketing technologies on its website after an evidentiary hearing. Asad v. Dick’s Sporting Goods, Inc., JAMS Ref. No. 5220005532 (Dec. 8,