E.D. Pa. · No. 2:26-cv-06155
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-06155 · 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $47.50M–$725M ▾Comparable rulings split: Bayhealth allowed a confidentiality claim over tracking tech to survive while Integris saw federal claims dismissed and state privacy claims left unclear; Gunnar Optiks shows courts often decline dismissal on pleadings for tracking/BIPA-type theories, remanding for factual development. 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. — health-provider tracking-tech disclosure claim survived MTD, closest analog to pharma website tracking allegations Main risk: Dismissal on grounds Boehringer isn't a 'healthcare provider' with confidentiality duty, distinguishing it from Bayhealth/Integris precedent This defendant: Six nearly-identical filings (Ginzo, Isaacs, Taylor, Dillinger, Rivera, Rhinebarger) suggest coordinated pixel-tracking litigation wave against this defendant. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $2.50M–$70M No confirmed class size or certification data; estimate relies on realized per-member benchmark (n=2) and analogous tracking-tech rulings, not Boehringer-specific facts. · grounded in 6 rulings, 10 settlements, 2 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | E.D. Pa. | 2026-08-21 | $47.50M–$725M comparable settlements |