S.D. Cal. · No. 3:26-cv-06157
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Turning Point USA, Inc.source ↗ filed by Swigart Law Group, APC · Judge Jinsook Ohta · No. 3:26-cv-06157 · 18:2511 Wiretapping - Injunctive Relief or Civil Fine · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M ▾Wiretap/pixel-type claims show a real split: Rand v. Eyemart Express and Gunnar Optiks survived on tracking-tech theories, while Tower Health and Nuance were dismissed on similar privacy-disclosure claims. Outcome is highly fact-dependent on consent and data type involved. 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: Rand v. Eyemart Express (5th Cir.) - survived because tracking pixel disclosed identifiable data without consent, closest factual analog if TPUSA used similar tech. Main risk: Tower Health-style dismissal for failure to plead concrete unauthorized disclosure or lack of standing/causation under Wiretap Act Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $2M–$25M Small, cross-sector comparable set; nonprofit political org differs materially from health/tech defendants in settlement data · grounded in 10 rulings, 10 settlements, 4 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | S.D. Cal. | 2026-10-29 | $59.50M–$725M comparable settlements |