E.D. Pa. · No. 2:26-cv-06125
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 Karen Spencer Marston · No. 2:26-cv-06125 · 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $47.50M–$725M ▾Similar health-privacy tracking-tech claims split: Doe v. Bayhealth survived on breach-of-confidentiality theory, while Doe v. Integris saw state privacy claims remanded as 'unclear' and Gunnar Optiks required factual development before dismissal could stand. Comparable settlements $47.50M–$725M median $59.50M · n=10 Meta $725M · Google Assistant $68M · Google LLC and Alp $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. — healthcare provider owed confidentiality duty for tracking-tech disclosures, closely analogous to pharma patient data sharing. Main risk: Motion to dismiss on causation/standing grounds, as in Integris where federal removal failed but underlying privacy claims remained unresolved and vulnerable. This defendant: Six separate suits (Ginzo, Isaacs, Taylor, Dillinger, Rivera, Rhinebarger) against BI signal a coordinated wave of tracking-tech privacy litigation, likely consolidated/MDL-bound. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $7.25M–$75M Small comparable set, no confirmed class size data for BI specifically, and six pending suits could consolidate, shifting valuation significantly. · grounded in 6 rulings, 10 settlements, 2 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | E.D. Pa. | 2026-08-20 | $47.50M–$725M comparable settlements |