Inside Class Actions

The latest developments and trends affecting class actions

In Smith v. Rack Room Shoes, Inc., No. 24-cv-06709-RFL (N.D. Cal. Sept. 21, 2026), Plaintiffs sought class certification on claims under the California Invasion of Privacy Act, Cal. Penal Code §§ 631 and 632, and the Federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2511(1)(a).  Plaintiffs asserted that Defendant Rack Room, an online shoe retailer, helped third-party…

On September 30, Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 690, a significant new law aimed at curbing the wave of lawsuits and demand letters asserting “pen register” claims under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”).  The legislation eliminates the private right of action for pen register and trap-and-trace claims arising from conduct occurring on internet…

A recent Ninth Circuit decision, Rushing v. Williams-Sonoma, Inc., 2026 WL 2731408 (9th Cir. Sept. 16, 2026), confirms that defendants seeking to compel arbitration based on internet contracts must do more than submit exemplar screenshots of webpages containing arbitration-related disclosures.  Rather, to meet their evidentiary burden, defendants must tie that visual evidence to the specific…

The Sixth Circuit’s recent en banc decision in Clippinger v. State Farm Auto. Ins. Co., 173 F.4th 817 (6th Cir. 2026), continues to shape class action litigation involving breach-of-contract claims. In Nichols v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., 2026 WL 2581605 (S.D. Ohio Sept. 1, 2026), the Southern District of Ohio denied class certification…

On August 28, 2026, the California Legislature passed SB 690, a significant bill aimed at curbing the flood of demand letters and lawsuits asserting “pen register” claims under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”). If enacted, the bill would eliminate the private right of action for website-based pen register claims and could affect…

The Ninth Circuit recently confirmed that when a putative class alleges that a marketing representation is deceptive because it is inconsistent with industry standards, plaintiffs must offer common, class-wide proof of deception.  See Rusoff v. The Happy Group, Inc., No. 24-7706 (9th Cir. Aug. 17, 2026).

In Rusoff, the defendant represented on its egg cartons…

In a recent decision challenging Google’s Gemini AI features, a California federal court held that allegations concerning an AI tool’s capabilities, without facts showing actual access or use of plaintiffs’ data, were insufficient to demonstrate the “concrete” harm required for Article III standing.  Thele v. Google LLC, 2026 WL 1970746 (N.D. Cal. July 7, 2026). …

In a decision highlighting the importance of testing standing through discovery, a Florida federal court dismissed privacy claims at the class-certification stage after concluding that neither named plaintiff could establish Article III standing.  Although the plaintiffs’ allegations survived a motion to dismiss, discovery later exposed their “utter disregard” for the allegedly private information at issue,…

The Third Circuit recently vacated and remanded a district court’s decision granting class certification for a class of third-party payors (“TPPs”) pursuing Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) claims against GlaxoSmithKline LLC (“GSK”). See In re Avandia Mktg., Sales Pracs. & Prod. Liab. Litig., 2026 WL 2093904 (3d Cir. July 21, 2026). The TPPs’…