E.D. Pa. · No. 2:26-cv-07055
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NOVO NORDISK INC.source ↗ filed by Nigh Goldenberg Raso & Vaughn, PLLC · No. 2:26-cv-07055 · 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M ▾Third Circuit precedent in Santoro v. Tower Health dismissed nearly identical Meta Pixel health-data-sharing claims with prejudice, directly adverse since E.D. Pa. sits in that circuit; but Bayhealth Medical Ctr. shows confidentiality-based health privacy claims can survive under state theories. Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M median $81.50M · n=10 Meta $725M · Google $425M · Google LLC $135M Per member (realized): ~$29 median · $29–$29 (n=2) Comparable verdict: Google LLC $425.70M · Google LLC $425.65M Key precedent: Santoro v. Tower Health (3rd Cir.) — same circuit, dismissed Pixel-based health data sharing claims, strong headwind for E.D. Pa. filing Main risk: 3rd Circuit affirmed dismissal with prejudice in Santoro for functionally identical pixel/tracking health-data theory This defendant: Three prior Privacy & Wiretap filings against Novo Nordisk entities suggest recurring tracking-technology exposure across jurisdictions. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $1.50M–$48M Small comparable sample, mixed circuit precedent, and unclear actual class definition make this a rough directional estimate only. · grounded in 8 rulings, 10 settlements, 4 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | E.D. Pa. | 2026-09-14 | $59.50M–$725M comparable settlements |