3rd Circuit Offers Guidance for CIPA, Calif. Medical Act Dismissal, Lawyers Say
A recent decision by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissing a class action that claimed the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) and California Medical Information Act (CMIA) violations provides useful insight for organizations facing charges under these statutes, Troutman lawyers said in a blog post.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Privacy Daily provides accurate coverage of newsworthy developments in data protection legislation, regulation, litigation, and enforcement for privacy professionals responsible for ensuring effective organizational data privacy compliance.
The ruling is part of a "recent trend of courts scrutinizing wiretap act claims and the requirements to pursue a cognizable claim,” the lawyers said. The court’s “recognition of how the pixel functions and who actually transmits the information is helpful to entities facing wiretap act claims involving” pixel transmissions.
Additionally, “guidance on what constitutes ‘medical information’ under the CMIA is an added authority" demonstrating "the transmission of a URL, without more, does not give rise to a CMIA claim."
In case 2:23-cv-20647, Angel Cole v. Quest Diagnostics, plaintiffs accused Quest of sharing personally identifiable information (PII) -- including protected medical information -- with Facebook via a tracking pixel (see 2511140032). The appeals court rejected the suit on Nov. 13 for poor evidence.
Since “the plaintiffs’ web browsers transmitted communications directly to the pixel provider,” the pixel provider is considered “a party to the communications,” so the CIPA claim was dismissed, the blog said.
Moreover, since “there was no evidence in the record that any medical information was transmitted to the pixel provider,” the CMIA claim was dropped as well, the lawyers added.