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
Latest from Inside Class Actions - Page 5
Valuation and Standing—The Sixth Circuit Creates a Class Action Split
In its recent decision in Clippinger v. State Farm, the Sixth Circuit addressed the certification of a class in a breach-of-contract dispute over insurance valuation claims, in which the defendant contended that individualized evidence would be needed to determine whether the alleged breach caused actual monetary injury to class members. Similar class certification issues have
Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Supplement Marketing Claims as Impliedly Preempted
In a win for implied preemption, the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed dismissal of supplement marketing claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL). The case, Bubak v. Golo, LLC, No. 24-492 (9th Cir. Oct. 9, 2025), held that the plaintiff’s UCL claim was impliedly preempted because it depended entirely on alleged violations of the federal
Standing in the Dark: Fourth Circuit Finds Standing for Driver’s License Information on the Dark Web
Courts continue to grapple with the type of “concrete harm” that is required to confer Article III standing under TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413 (2021), particularly in data breach and privacy class actions. On October 14, the Fourth Circuit contributed to this debate, holding that allegations that plaintiffs’ driver’s license data had been
SEC Changes Policy on Issuer-Investor Arbitration Provisions With Important Implications for Securities Class Actions
The SEC has long had a policy that effectively prohibited public companies from requiring arbitration of shareholder claims under the Securities Act[1] and Securities Exchange Act.[2] Last month, the SEC announced a change to that policy. In its September 17, 2025 Policy Statement, the SEC stated that, effective September 19, 2025, “the
Illinois Court Narrows Lawsuit Over Medical Center’s Use of Pixel Technology and Strikes Class Claims
In a recent decision by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Judge Georgia N. Alexakis narrowed and struck class claims alleging that the University of Chicago Medical Center’s use of pixel technology violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA).
The plaintiff, Sophia Hartley, asserted on behalf of a putative class
Post-Cantero, Ninth Circuit Allows Prior National Bank Act Preemption Decision To Remain Standing
In 2018, the Ninth Circuit held in Lusnak v. Bank of America, N.A. that California’s interest-on-escrow law was not preempted by the National Bank Act because the California law did not prevent or significantly interfere with the bank’s exercise of its powers. 883 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir. 2018). Six years after Lusnak, the Supreme Court
Post-Cantero, First Circuit Sets Demanding National Bank Act Preemption Test
Lenders often require borrowers to keep money in a mortgage escrow account, and those funds are used to pay taxes, mortgage insurance, and other costs throughout the year. At least 12 states require lenders to pay the borrower interest on the money held in these escrow accounts. And for more than a decade, certain national
District Court Requires Specific Testing Allegations in Dismissing PFAS Class Action
A court in the Southern District of New York recently dismissed a proposed class action alleging that consumers paid a premium for juice products advertised as “made simply” with “all natural ingredients,” reasoning that the plaintiff lacked standing in light of flaws in his testing allegations. See Lurenz v. Coca-Cola Co., 2025 WL 2773188 (S.D.N.Y.
Federal Court Fries Data Breach Class Action for Lack of Standing
A federal court in North Carolina dismissed a putative data breach class action against Bojangles because the plaintiffs failed to show that there was an actual or imminent misuse of their personal information as a result of the breach. Dougherty v. Bojangles’ Restaurants, Inc., 2025 WL 2810673 (W.D.N.C. Sept. 30, 2025).