U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers for Northern California in Oakland signed an order Wednesday consolidating three Video Privacy Protection Act class actions into the first-filed case, Minahan v. Google (docket 4:22-cv-05652). All three complaints allege Google engaged in the unlawful retention of its customers’ video rental history and other personal information in violation of the VPPA. The three cases “concern common questions of law and fact,” said the order. The judge ordered the four plaintiffs in the three cases to file their consolidated class action within 30 days and for Google to respond to the consolidated complaint 30 days later.

A Nov. 9 privacy class action alleging that Cabela's third-party vendors, including Microsoft, embed snippets of computer code on consumers’ browsers was reassigned Wednesday from U.S. District Court for Western Missouri in Springfield to U.S. District Court in Kansas City, said a clerk's order (docket 6:22-3288). Plaintiff Arlie Tucker, St. Clair, Missouri, has a similar complaint with the same counsel against Bass Pro Shops parent BPS Direct, and the two complaints should be heard by the same Kansas City judge, Stephen Bough, said a Dec. 21 notice of related action requesting the transfer. Defendants’ counsel didn't object. The complaint against Cabela’s -- alleging the third-party vendors create and deploy session replay codes at the defendant's request to recreate visitors' entire visit to the e-commerce site -- makes “substantially similar allegations” to those against BPS Direct, said the notice. Defendants’ directive to the session replay providers "to secretly deploy" the session replay code "results in the electronic equivalent of looking over the shoulder” of each visitor to the e-commerce site for the "entire duration of their website interaction," the plaintiff asserted. The complaints against both retailers allege their e-commerce conduct violates several federal and state laws, including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and the Missouri Wiretap Act.

U.S. District Judge Lynn Winmill for Northern Idaho in Coeur d'Alene docketed the notice of a Feb. 21 virtual hearing (docket 2:22-cv-00377) on Kochava’s Oct. 28 motion for dismissal of the FTC’s Aug. 29 privacy complaint against the analytics firm (see 2212050061) for failure to state a claim. The agency's complaint, filed in the courthouse in Boise, is seeking a permanent injunction enjoining Kochava from acquiring consumers’ geolocation data and selling it in a format that allows entities to track their movements to and from sensitive locations such as medical, reproductive and mental health facilities, temporary shelters or places of worship.

U.S. District Judge Andrea Wood for Northern Illinois in Chicago ordered plaintiff Daineira Mangum to file a response by Jan. 6 to AMC Networks’ motion to dismiss Mangum’s Video Privacy Protection Act class action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, said a clerk’s minute entry Dec. 7 (docket 1:22-cv-04857). AMC’s reply is due Jan. 27, and discovery in the case is stayed pending the resolution of the motion to dismiss, it said. Mangum alleges AMC knowingly disclosed to Meta personally identifiable information and computer files containing video and their corresponding URLs (see 2212010044). AMC denies any VPPA wrongdoing, and believes no class should be certified.

U.S. District Judge Elaine Bucklo for Northern Illinois in Chicago granted the unopposed motion of Amazon Web Services for a deadline extension to Jan. 16 to answer plaintiff Cynthia Redd’s complaint that AWS violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (see 2212050036), said a notification Thursday of a minute entry in docket 1:22-cv-06779. Redd alleges Wonolo, an app-based job placement company, used AWS’ cloud-based software service, Rekognition, to verify the identities of Wonolo users who interacted with its app. By providing the Rekognition service to Wonolo, AWS violated BIPA by possessing the plaintiff’s biometric data without developing and adhering to a publicly available retention and deletion schedule, said Redd’s putative Sept. 1 class action in an Illinois state court. In removing the case Dec. 2 to federal court in Chicago, AWS said it “expressly denies” it violated the BIPA.

Defendant Amazon Web Services seeks an extension to Jan. 16 to answer plaintiff Cynthia Redd’s complaint alleging AWS violates the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, said its unopposed motion Monday (docket 1:22-cv-6779). In the Sept. 1 state court putative class action that AWS removed Friday to U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois in Chicago, Redd alleged Wonolo, an app-based job placement company, used AWS’ cloud-based software service, Rekognition, to verify the identities of Wonolo users who interacted with its app (see 2212050036). By providing the Rekognition service to Wonolo, AWS violated the BIPA by possessing the plaintiff’s biometric data without developing and adhering to a publicly available retention and deletion schedule, said the complaint. AWS said it plans to “defend this matter vigorously.”

The FTC raises "a menagerie of overtly politicized but factually inept scenarios” that rely on “bankrupt assumptions,” said app analytics company Kochava Friday in a reply brief Friday (docket 2:22-cv-00377) in U.S. District Court for Idaho in Boise in support of its motion for dismissal of the FTC's Aug. 29 privacy complaint. The agency is seeking a permanent injunction enjoining Kochava from acquiring consumers’ precise geolocation data and selling it in a format that allows entities to track their movements to and from sensitive locations such as medical, reproductive and mental health facilities, temporary shelters or places of worship. The FTC cited Kochava claims that its data feed delivers “raw latitude/longitude data with volumes around 94B+ geo transactions per month, 125 million monthly active users, and 35 million daily active users, on average observing more than 90 daily transactions per device.” The company has sold access to its data feeds on online data marketplaces that are publicly accessible, the FTC said. Though it charges a monthly subscription fee of “thousands of dollars” for access, it has made its Kochava Data Sample publicly available “with only minimal steps and no restrictions on usage,” it said. Identification of sensitive and private characteristics of consumers from the data sold and offered by Kochava “injures or is likely to injure consumers through exposure to stigma, discrimination, physical violence, emotional distress or other harms,” said the FTC. The complaint “fails to state a claim against Kochava because it fails to cite a single law or authority, which proscribes Kochava’s legitimate business practices due to an actual (non-speculative) harm,” the company said.

Unnamed plaintiffs in the privacy class action that seeks an injunction to bar Meta from intercepting or disseminating patient information collected through its Pixel tracking tool (see 2211150003) support appointing Jay Barnes of Simmons Hanly and Geoffrey Graber of Cohen Milstein as interim lead counsel, said a filing Wednesday (docket 3:22-cv-03580) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Francisco. Both lawyers “have demonstrated their ability to steer complex litigation against formidable opponents, including Meta, but they are not ‘repeat players’ routinely appointed to leadership roles in class actions,” it said. The court “should appoint the lawyers with the most comprehensive and relevant experience to serve as interim lead counsel,” it said. A hearing on the issue of interim lead counsel is set for Dec. 14 at 2 p.m. PST.

Plaintiff Daineira Mangum and defendant AMC Networks agree to propose that the U.S. Court for Northern Illinois in Chicago postpone a case plan in Mangum’s Video Privacy Protection Act class action pending the outcome of AMC’s Motion to Dismiss and Stay Discovery, said the parties in a joint status report Wednesday (docket 1:22-cv-04857). Mangum alleges AMC knowingly disclosed to Meta personally identifiable information and computer files containing video and their corresponding URLs. AMC denies it violated the VPPA, and believes no class should be certified. It also thinks the claim should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because Mangum lacks standing. The joint report proposes that Mangum should file her response in opposition to the motion for dismissal by Jan. 5, and that AMC should reply by Jan. 27. There have been no settlement talks, and the parties don't believe a settlement conference “would be productive at this time,” it said. Both sides decline consent to have the case heard by a magistrate judge.

Google consented Tuesday to defend before a magistrate judge the class action allegations that YouTube violates consumers’ privacy, it said in a filing Tuesday (docket 4:22-cv-05713) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in Oakland. Plaintiff Moshe Torczyner previously declined magistrate judge jurisdiction. Torczyner, a West Hempstead, New York, consumer, alleged in his Oct. 4 class action that YouTube unlawfully retains information that identifies consumers as having requested or obtained specific video materials or services. Google deadline to respond to the complaint is extended to Dec. 16.