Broken Cookie Banner Premium

$500

Sealed by May 30, 2026 · FRE 901 chain of custody · Site state has likely changed

Sealed forensic record · Report #515

What's for sale here is a dated, hashed snapshot of a defendant's live tracking behavior, marketing representations, and consent UX, sealed under FRE 901 chain of custody on the day we captured it. Defendants rewrite their policies and pull their pixels the moment a complaint lands — this record is the only proof of what the site was doing before.

Case at a glance

LocationHQ: California

Nat'l classCalif. statewide — CIPA is state law

ArbitrationArb risk — mass-arbitration target

ClaimsCIPA § 631 / Smith v. LoanMe (Cal. 2021) / Javier v. Assurance IQ (9th Cir. 2022) / In re Meta Pixel Healthcare Litig.

**BROKEN COOKIE BANNER — CIPA § 631 / Smith v. LoanMe / Javier v. Assurance IQ / In re Meta Pixel Healthcare Litig.** Consumer-facing platform defendant. Agent captured 128 third-party tracker fires across ~15–25 pages of sealed PDF documentation. No verbatim user-facing representations were extracted during the run. Zero accessibility violations detected. Six screenshots with chain-of-custody seals document the tracker activity. No wrap evidence or scope walls encountered. Sealed PDF: 15–25 pages, chain-of-custody verified.

Case theory: CIPA § 631 — consent-defect

What you receive

Sealed PDF report (typical 15–28 pp) with full chain of custody — SHA-256 + RFC 3161 timestamps on every artifact
Verbatim binding representations with Wayback-anchored class-period bounds
Full network capture: every tracker fire, sensitive transmission, identity-sync event
Wrap classification: BROWSEWRAP / CLICKWRAP / SIGN-IN-WRAP verdict + Specht-line alignment
Per-circuit case-law alignment (LIKELY_UNENFORCEABLE / LIKELY_ENFORCEABLE / JURISDICTIONALLY_DEPENDENT)
Defendant name + domain — revealed at purchase