E.D. Pa. · No. 2:26-cv-05659
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 · No. 2:26-cv-05659 · 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $30M–$725M ▾Comparable privacy-tracking rulings split: Bayhealth allowed breach-of-confidentiality claims to survive, Gunnar Optiks was vacated/remanded for factual development, while Integris saw federal claims dismissed and state claims left unclear. No trial or dismissal record yet for BI-specific facts. 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 Key precedent: Doe v. Bayhealth Medical Ctr. — health-provider tracking-technology disclosure claim survived MTD, closest factual analog to pharma website/app tracking. Main risk: Dismissal on wiretap consent/party-to-communication grounds, as seen in Integris where core sharing claims stalled at 'unclear' stage. This defendant: Six near-simultaneous filings (Rhinebarger, Krueger, Lipkey, Ramos, Jones, House) suggest coordinated multi-plaintiff wave, likely to consolidate. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $3.75M–$52.50M Small comparable sample, no BI-specific rulings yet, and class size is an estimate absent disclosed user metrics. · grounded in 6 rulings, 10 settlements, 2 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | E.D. Pa. | 2026-08-07 | $30M–$725M comparable settlements |