E.D. Pa. · No. 2:26-cv-06299
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| THE KIBITZ ROOM KING OF PRUSSIA, LLCsource ↗ filed by MURPHY LAW GROUP LLC · Judge Mia Roberts Perez · No. 2:26-cv-06299 · 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $47.50M–$725M ▾Comparable privacy/tracking claims split: Bayhealth's confidentiality claim survived MTD while BIPA claims in Gunnar Optiks were vacated/remanded on factual grounds, showing courts often let these proceed past pleading stage. But defendant here is a single small restaurant, unlike the tech-platform comparables driving most rulings and settlements. Comparable settlements $47.50M–$725M median $63.75M · n=10 Meta $725M · Google LLC $135M · Google $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. — confidentiality/tracking-tech claim survived MTD, closest analog for a small business using third-party trackers. Main risk: Dismissal for lack of actionable 'interception' or standing, similar to unresolved/dismissed claims in Integris and LabCorp rulings. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $20K–$900K Comparables are dominated by mega-cap tech settlements; scaling to a single small restaurant location is highly speculative and likely overstates true exposure. · grounded in 6 rulings, 10 settlements, 2 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | E.D. Pa. | 2026-08-26 | $47.50M–$725M comparable settlements |