Standing in biometric privacy lawsuits needs clarification from U.S. Supreme Court, Clearview AI argues
A motion has been filed by Clearview with the Seventh Circuit Court to halt the case the court recently remanded back to state court pending a decision from the Supreme Court on whether to hear a further appeal.
The company argued unsuccessfully that plaintiff Melissa Thornley’s proposed class action alleges a concrete and particularized injury, and therefore has standing in federal court, in asking the court to reverse its earlier ruling remanding the case to Illinois court. The Seventh Circuit had ruled that the plaintiff’s decision to pursue allegations under BIPA Section 15(c) for data sharing without alleging violations under Section 15(a) and 15(b) on informed consent and data retention is a legitimate approach.
Clearview’s counsel told Bloomberg Law that the company has not yet filed its petition for review with the Supreme Court.
The issue of standing for statutory violations needs to be clarified by the Supreme Court, Clearview contends in its motion, “as lower courts have struggled to identify consistent rules or standards.”