.png){kind=logo}
Notable CIPA & Wiretap Lawsuit Cases
The following information is intended to aid attorneys for TrueVault customers who have been targeted for lawsuits under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) and other wiretap statutes. It is a starting point for legal research into potential defenses to these lawsuits, not a substitute for legal advice or the assistance of a qualified attorney.
Case Law
Article III Standing
Rodriguez v. Autotrader.com (C.D. Cal January 8, 2025) 2:24-cv-08735 (dismissed when plaintiff did not describe the type of information that was intercepted by search bar, except to say it was private and confidential. Court stated that the injury-in-fact depends on the type of information revealed.)
Gabrielli v. Insider, Inc. (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 18, 2025) No. 24-cv-01566 (dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, because collection of the plaintiff’s IP address does not amount to a concrete injury that can be redressed by the courts)
Zhizhi Xu v. Reuters (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 13, 2025) No. 24-cv-2466 (dismissed for lack of standing due to lack of injury. Also, IP addresses are not personal information, as far as federal common law is concerned.)
Lightoller v. Jetblue (S.D. Cal., June 12, 2023) No. 23-CV-00361 (session replay collected while plaintiff checked flight pricing is not personal information and plaintiff had not suffered injury-in-fact)
- But see: D'Angelo v. FCA (S.D. Cal. 2024) 726 F.Supp.3d 1179 (declining to follow Lightoller)
Note: Many of these cases are drawing from TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez 594 U.S. 413 (2021)
Reading, or attempting to read or learn the contents of a communication
Williams v. DDR Media, (N.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2024) 2024 WL 4859078 (defendants won summary judgement because replay software provider did not attempt to read or understand the contents of any communications captured by the software)
Torres v. Prudential Financial, (N.D. Cal., Apr. 17, 2025) 22-cv-07465 (granting summary judgment to defendants because plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that session-replay software read or attempted to read contents of communications in transit, even though the sessions could be viewed later)
No Expectation of Privacy for Tester Plaintiffs
Rodriguez v. Autotrader.com (C.D. Cal April 4 2025) 2:24-cv-08735 (so-called "tester plaintiff" did not have an expectation of privacy when they deliberately sought out privacy violations. Read more here and here.)
Articles
California Federal Court Grants Summary Judgment to CIPA Defendants