In Hinton v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., No. 23-cv-04529-JD, 2026 WL 2959993 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 30, 2026), the court denied class certification in a lawsuit asserting a claim under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”). 

Plaintiffs alleged that the defendant embedded tracking technologies supplied by Google, Meta, and other third parties on its website, allowing those third parties to intercept visitors’ identities and private health information.  Plaintiffs sought certification of damages and injunctive-relief classes consisting of California users who visited specific healthcare-related pages or searched for specific topics on those pages during the class period.  The court found that plaintiffs had “manifestly failed to meet their burden under Rule 23(b),” which “alone warranted denial of certification” as to both classes.   

Continue Reading N.D. Cal. Denies Class Certification in CIPA Tracking Case for Lack of Common Proof

The Ninth Circuit recently reiterated that plaintiffs seeking class certification cannot show damages are susceptible to common proof by “[m]erely gesturing” at a damages model or “describing a general method” of calculating damages.  That reminder comes from Heagney v. John Paul Mitchell Systems, No. 25-6818, 2026 WL 3017602 (9th…

Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Vacates Class Certification Based on Insufficiently Reliable Damages Model

In In re Concrete and Cement Additives Antitrust Litigation, the District Court for the Southern District of New York recently dismissed with prejudice claims brought by a proposed class of construction companies and concrete distributors against the world’s largest producers of concrete and cement additives (“CCAs”). The class complaint…

Continue Reading Global-Market Price-Fixing Theory in Concrete Admixtures Class Action Rejected Under the FTAIA

In Shah v. Politico LLC, 5:25-cv-05213 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 25, 2026), the Court addressed plaintiffs’ attempts to invoke equitable tolling, delayed discovery, and fraudulent concealment to save untimely claims under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”).  

Defendant Politico LLC (“Politico”) had filed a motion to dismiss allegations…

Continue Reading N.D. Cal. Rejects Non-Specific Tolling Arguments in Shah v. Politico LLC

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 pixel-tracking services intercept private communications containing personally identifiable information.  The Court found that Plaintiffs had no Article III standing, rejecting harm theories based on both actual and attempted interception of private information, and dismissed those claims without prejudice while denying class certification.

Continue Reading Pixel Tracking Technologies and Article III Standing: Lessons from the Rack Room Shoes Decision

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…

Continue Reading California Governor Signs SB 690, Eliminating Private Website-Based CIPA Pen Register Claims and Calling for Broader CIPA Reform

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 users at issue—showing that the webpages actually appeared as depicted in the exemplars at the time those users accessed them.

In Rushing, the plaintiffs brought a putative class action alleging false advertising related to the thread count of defendants’ bedding products.  After the district court certified a class of California consumers, the defendants moved to compel arbitration of claims by class members who had purportedly agreed to defendants’ arbitration agreement.  In support, defendants submitted declarations and accompanying exemplar screenshots of checkout and account sign-up processes on their webpages that contained language disclosing that taking some action on the page constituted agreement to defendants’ terms and conditions, which included an arbitration agreement.

Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Emphasizes Importance of Connecting Visual Proof to Class Members for Motions to Compel Arbitration

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 in a putative class action challenging the method State Farm used to calculate “actual cash value” payments for totaled vehicles.

Continue Reading Ohio Federal Court Denies Class Certification in Contract Dispute, Illustrating Strategies For Defeating Similar Claims

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 many pending lawsuits filed since January 1, 2025.

Continue Reading California Legislature Passes CIPA Pen Register Reform Bill and Sends It to Governor

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…

Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Hatches New Opinion Confirming False Advertising Plaintiffs Must Offer Common Proof of Deception