E.D. Pa. · No. 2:26-cv-05968
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 Michael M. Baylson · No. 2:26-cv-05968 · 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $30M–$725M ▾Health-privacy tracking claims have split outcomes: Bayhealth allowed breach-of-confidentiality claims to survive MTD, while Integris Health saw state tracking claims remain unclear and Gunnar Optiks needed factual development before dismissal was vacated. No clean win/loss pattern exists for pharma website-tracking wiretap theories yet. Comparable settlements $30M–$725M median $59.50M · n=10 Meta $725M · Google Assistant $68M · Google LLC and Alp $68M Per member (realized): ~$29 median · $25–$30 (n=3) Comparable verdict: Google LLC $425.70M · Google LLC $425M Key precedent: Doe v. Bayhealth Medical Ctr. — healthcare provider tracking-tech disclosure claim survived MTD, directly analogous to pharma patient-data tracking theory here. Main risk: Dismissal on statutory/technical grounds (e.g., no 'acting under' federal officer, no interception under wiretap statute) as seen in Integris Health removal ruling and LabCorp's narrow reading of governing rules. This defendant: Six nearly-identical Privacy & Wiretap filings against BI suggest coordinated MDL-style pixel/tracking litigation, raising consolidation and precedent-setting risk. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $2.50M–$30M Small comparable sample, no confirmed BI-specific class size or tracking technology detail; estimate highly sensitive to actual website/portal user counts. · grounded in 6 rulings, 10 settlements, 2 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | E.D. Pa. | 2026-08-17 | $30M–$725M comparable settlements |