Damages in Google’s biometric data privacy settlement half of per-person estimate
Members of the class in a $100 million settlement of a biometric data privacy lawsuit against Google will receive less per person than previously anticipated, the Chicago Tribune reports after final approval was granted by a Cook County Judge.
Qualifying plaintiffs submitting claims will receive checks for about $154 each, a far cry from the $200 to $400 estimated at the time. Plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive 35 percent of the total award, plus costs and expenses, reduced from the 40 percent initially agreed to. The five named plaintiffs are in line for $5,000 each.
Google admits no wrongdoing in the case, which was filed over the company’s alleged use of face biometrics in the grouping function of the Google Photos application.
Pending any appeals, payments could be delivered in 90 days.
More cases concluding
Details have also emerged in Kronos’ settlement of a lawsuit over its use of biometrics in employee time and attendance systems sold in Illinois for $15.3 million.
Top Class Actions reports that any Illinois resident using biometric shift clocks from Kronos between 2014 and March 20, 2022 may be eligible to share in the settlement under the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act, which is still subject to judicial approval.
The company does not admit any wrongdoing in the settlement agreement, but will pay class members an amount estimated between $290 and $580 each for alleged violations of BIPA’s informed consent requirements. Funds remaining after the first round of distribution will be donated to Legal Aid Chicago and the ACLU of Illinois.
Claims must be submitted by December 6, 2022, the deadline for objections is December 8, and a hearing for final approval is scheduled for December 20.
A suit filed under BIPA against Frames for America, operator of the FramesDirect.com retail website for glasses has been dismissed from federal court, the Cook County Record reports.
U.S. District Judge Harry Leinenweber ruled that BIPA includes a clause deferring to HIPAA, the federal health data protection law, in excluding information gathered in healthcare settings from biometric identifiers, as defined in the Act.
The plaintiff argued that HIPAA was not relevant to the complaint, as no medical professional was consulted, but Leinenweber cited precedent from Vo vs. VSP Retail Development Holding, which was resolved in March of 2020.