Article Iii Standing News Today

Supreme Court consider whether a self appointed Americans with Disabilities Act tester have Article III standing to challenge a business failure to provide disability accessibility information on its website even if they lack any intention of visiting that business

Plaintiff’s complaint put forward two theories of injury OEM customers forced to pay non-FRAND royalty rates and inability to Obtain License on FRAND temrs;Fifth circuit did not describe a concrete injury sufficient to support Article III standing,

In Ex rel Situated v. Med-Data Inc, federal court in Kansas joined a number of other courts, plaintiff Did not establish Article III Standing, federal courts have, and continue to dismiss data privacy cases at the pleadings stage for lack of standing.

The decision reiterates that plaintiffs in data event litigations who allege they are merely at future risk of speculative injury continue to face an uphill battle in establishing Article III standing.  Greenstein v. Noblr Reciprocal Exch.

The Supreme Court has vacated a $9.7 million judgment against Rocket Mortgage, LLC formerly Quicken Loans and ordered the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its ruling in light of TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez 2021.

The Supreme Court has vacated a $9.7 million judgment against Rocket Mortgage, LLC formerly Quicken Loans and ordered the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its ruling in light of TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez 2021.

2021 was another year of high activity in the realm of data event and cybersecurity litigations with several noteworthy developments. We have been tracking these cases throughout the year. Read on for key trends and what to expect going into 2022.

The Supreme Court’s decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez continues to have a long-lasting impact in the privacy class action sphere; some of the biggest changes in financial privacy in 2021, and what it means for individuals, businesses and litigants in the new year.

A federal court this week in the McDonald’s AI litigation found that Plaintiff lacks Article III standing to pursue BIPA Section 15a and 15c claims. Consequently, it remanded these claims back to state court while letting other BIPA claims remain in federal court.

Addressing for the first time Article III standing in a trademark case, the Federal Circuit held that hypothetical future injury is insufficient to establish standing to oppose a trademark application. Brooklyn Brewery Corp. v. Brooklyn Brew Shop, LLC,