S.D. Cal. · No. 3:26-cv-06263
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flex Marketing Group, LLCsource ↗ filed by Pacific Trial Attorneys · Judge Jinsook Ohta · No. 3:26-cv-06263 · 28:1453 Class Action Fairness Act · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M ▾Comparable privacy/wiretap rulings split roughly evenly: Bayhealth, Gunnar Optiks (x2), and Eyemart Express survived pixel/tracking claims, while Tower Health, Nuance, and Walker were dismissed on similar theories. Outcomes turn heavily on jurisdiction-specific exceptions (e.g., HIPAA/GLBA carve-outs) and pleading specificity. 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 plaintiffs specifically pled Meta Pixel disclosed individually identifiable data without consent, a fact pattern likely mirrored here. Main risk: Dismissal on statutory exemption or failure to plead actual interception/disclosure, as in Tower Health and Nuance where defendants qualified for carve-outs Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $150K–$11.25M Small defendant with limited financial data; class size is speculative without discovery on actual user/visitor counts, and no prior litigation history to anchor settlement posture. · grounded in 10 rulings, 10 settlements, 4 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | S.D. Cal. | 2026-11-03 | $59.50M–$725M comparable settlements |