FB pixel

Application of BIPA amendment to pending biometric data privacy cases disputed

Application of BIPA amendment to pending biometric data privacy cases disputed
 

Plaintiffs and defendants are arguing over whether an amendment to Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act limiting liability to one count for each biometric process applies to cases currently before the courts.

State legislators amended BIPA earlier this year to make clear that violations do not accrue with repeated scans of exactly the same type.

Now, plaintiffs in a pair of cases have filed motions asking for a federal court to reject a ruling that the change applies to all cases not yet settled.  That ruling was made by Judge Elanie E. Bucklo of the Northern District of Illinois last week, Law360 reports.

Separate lawsuits involving Sabert Corp., a food service company and Viking SupplyNet, a sprinkler parts distributor, accuse the businesses of violating BIPA’s informed consent requirements when scanning employee’s fingerprints for biometric time and attendance tracking.

Bucklo ruled that the amendment applies to a lawsuit she was presiding over against Central Transport LLC, and the two above companies each argued that the same criteria apply to them. That means the potential damages do not meet the $75,000 threshold for federal diversity jurisdiction, and the suits should therefore be dismissed.

The plaintiffs in both cases argue that five state court decisions differ from Bucklo’s, and must be taken into account.

The companies returned that those decisions were “mixed,” and plaintiffs fired back that their claims are “inaccurate and misleading.” Four of the decisions issued since October were “persuasive reasoned decisions,” plaintiffs argue.

The difference in interpretation comes from Bucklo’s contention that the amendment was made in response to a call for clarification from the State Supreme Court, and therefore applies to all cases from that time forward. The amendment does not include language specifying that it applies retroactively.

Further motions or appeals could follow.

Related Posts

Article Topics

 |   |   | 

Latest Biometrics News

 

UK Online Safety Act passes first enforcement deadline, threatening big fines

One of the main reasons regulations are not especially popular among ambitious CEOs is that they can cost money. This…

 

Digital ID, passkeys are transforming Australian government services

Tax has gone digital in Australia, where businesses now need to use the Australian Government Digital ID System to verify…

 

Biometrics ‘the lynchpin of where gaming companies need to be,’ says gambling executive

Online gambling continues to be a fruitful market for biometrics providers, as betting platforms seek secure and frictionless KYC, onboarding,…

 

Surveillance, identity and the right to go missing

By Professor Fraser Sampson, former UK Biometrics & Surveillance Camera Commissioner Do we have a right to go missing? The global…

 

NADRA and NIRA work to advance Somalia’s digital identification program

Pakistan’s National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) remains committed to helping Somalia reach new milestones in its national ID card…

 

Advanced deepfake defenses mustering in India, US, South Korea

Digital threats are global threats. As deepfakes generated with generative AI algorithms flood the online space, governments and private companies…

Comments

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Most Viewed This Week

Featured Company

Biometrics Insight, Opinion

Digital ID In-Depth

Biometrics White Papers

Biometrics Events