N.D. Cal. · No. 3:26-cv-08712
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cathay Banksource ↗ filed by Law Offices of Ross Cornell APC · No. 3:26-cv-08712 · 28:1331 Fed. Question · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $30M–$725M ▾Bayhealth survived breach-of-confidentiality claims against a healthcare-like duty, and Gunnar Optiks' BIPA claim ultimately survived remand, showing privacy/wiretap claims often clear MTD when factual questions on data collection remain. Integris shows state privacy claims for third-party data sharing can stay 'unclear' pending discovery, reflecting genuine dismissal risk for bank-tracking theories. Comparable settlements $30M–$725M median $59.50M · n=10 Meta $725M · Google $68M · Google LLC and Alp $68M Per member (realized): ~$29 median · $29–$30 (n=3) Comparable verdict: Google LLC $425.70M · Google LLC $425M Key precedent: Doe v. Bayhealth Medical Ctr. — survived MTD on confidentiality duty, closest analog to a financial institution's duty over customer data. Main risk: Dismissal for lack of interception/consent under wiretap theory, as seen in Integris' 'unclear' outcome on third-party data-sharing claims. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $1.45M–$7.20M Small n on both rulings and per-member benchmark; theory-specific (wiretap/CIPA) case law for banks is sparse, so estimate is directional only. · grounded in 6 rulings, 10 settlements, 2 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | N.D. Cal. | 2026-08-20 | $30M–$725M comparable settlements |