E.D. Pa. · No. 2:26-cv-05524
Full docket on CourtListener ↗
No federal docket timeline hydrated for this case yet (state-court settlements have no RECAP docket).
| Matter | Type | Practice area | Court | Date | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CUSTOMERS BANCORP, INC.source ↗ filed by Bell & Bell LLP · No. 2:26-cv-05524 · 18:1514A Sarbanes-Oxley Act · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $30M–$68M ▾Privacy/wiretap claims involving financial institutions show split outcomes: Bayhealth's confidentiality claim survived MTD, while Integris's data-sharing claims were deemed unclear and BIPA claims in Gunnar were vacated for factual development rather than resolved. No case directly involves a bank defendant, limiting precision. Comparable settlements $30M–$68M median $59.50M · n=10 Google Assistant $68M · Google $68M · Google LLC and Alp $68M Per member (realized): ~$29 median · $25–$30 (n=4) Comparable verdict: Google LLC $425.70M · Google LLC $425M Key precedent: Doe v. Bayhealth Medical Ctr. — survived MTD on breach of confidentiality via tracking tech, closest analog to bank website/app tracking claims. Main risk: Dismissal on threshold issues like consent or lack of 'contents' interception, as seen in LabCorp's narrower statutory reading Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $3.75M–$22.50M Small, non-bank-specific comparable set and unconfirmed class size make this a rough directional estimate only. · grounded in 6 rulings, 10 settlements, 2 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | E.D. Pa. | 2026-08-04 | $30M–$68M comparable settlements |