E.D. Pa. · No. 2:26-cv-05649
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.source ↗ filed by Keller Postman LLC · Judge Mary Kay Costello · No. 2:26-cv-05649 · 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $30M–$725M ▾Comparable rulings split: Bayhealth confirmed a confidentiality duty for health-data disclosure while Integris and LabCorp left key theories 'unclear,' and Gunnar Optiks shows tracking-tech claims often survive early dismissal only on fact-intensive grounds. Comparable settlements $30M–$725M median $59.50M · n=10 Meta $725M · Google $68M · Google Assistant $68M Per member (realized): ~$30 median · $29–$30 (n=2) Comparable verdict: Google LLC $425.70M · Google LLC $425M Class (from complaint): Purchasers and payors of Combivent Respimat and Spiriva Respimat inhalation sprays on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated. Key precedent: Doe v. Bayhealth Medical Ctr. — health-provider tracking-tech disclosure claim survived MTD, closest analog to pharma-related data sharing. Main risk: Dismissal on standing/causation grounds as in LabCorp (loss causation) or removal/jurisdictional dismissal as in Integris This defendant: Six separate Privacy & Wiretap filings against Boehringer Ingelheim suggest coordinated multidistrict-style consumer litigation, raising settlement pressure. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $9M–$70M Theory label (Privacy & Wiretap) mismatches class definition (drug purchasers/payors), so per-member and class-size anchors are extrapolated, not directly matched. · grounded in 6 rulings, 10 settlements, 2 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | E.D. Pa. | 2026-08-07 | $30M–$725M comparable settlements |