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
Continue Reading Gemini Tracking Allegations Fall Short of Article III Standing
Vivian Wen
Yuxin (Vivian) Wen is an associate in the firm’s New York office. She is a member of the Litigation and Investigations Practice group and focuses on commercial litigation, copyright and trademark litigation, class actions, international arbitration, and white collar defense and investigations.
In her pro bono work, Vivian has enjoyed representing clients in a wide range of matters, including an independent journalist in trademark litigation, a professional photographer in a copyright dispute, a criminal defendant in a commutation of sentence application, and individuals seeking various forms of immigration reliefs.
Another Federal Court Dismisses Wiretapping Claims Premised on Crime-Tort Exception
Another recent federal court decision endorsed the “heightened intent requirement” for satisfying the crime-tort exception of the federal Wiretap Act. Progin v. UMass Mem’l Health Care, Inc., 2026 WL 632770, at *4–5 (D. Mass. Mar. 6, 2026).
In Progin, the plaintiffs claimed that the defendants, healthcare and hospital…
Continue Reading Another Federal Court Dismisses Wiretapping Claims Premised on Crime-Tort ExceptionEyewear Company Wins Dismissal of Pixel Wiretapping Suit
Heath and health-adjacent websites, from home pregnancy test companies to eyewear companies, continue to be a target for wiretapping lawsuits if they use pixels or other common-place third-party technologies. A Texas federal court recently dismissed one such suit challenging the use of website pixels by Eyemart Express, LLC, a company…
Continue Reading Eyewear Company Wins Dismissal of Pixel Wiretapping SuitCollection of Website Visit Time Stamp Not Enough to Confer Article III Standing
Capture of personal or private information is a prerequisite to Article III standing in wiretapping cases brought under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”). As we reported on here, when a plaintiff fails to plead the capture of any such information, courts have dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint for…
Continue Reading Collection of Website Visit Time Stamp Not Enough to Confer Article III StandingWebsite Wiretapping Litigation: Recent Decisions and Developments
Website analytics and advertising tools, such as pixels, are regularly targeted in lawsuits brought under various wiretap laws, including the federal Wiretap Act and the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”). Over the last several months, we have featured posts discussing an important decision from Massachusetts’ highest court about the availability of website wiretap suits under Massachusetts law, an opinion from a California court about a new “pen register” theory under CIPA, and more. These posts, and other highlights, include the following:
Continue Reading Website Wiretapping Litigation: Recent Decisions and Developments