Smartphone Privacy Class Action Claims Partially Denied

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

A federal district judge partially granted and partially denied the defending companies’ motion to dismiss the second consolidated amended class action lawsuit filed in the ongoing smartphone privacy multidistrict litigation In re: Carrier IQ Inc. Consumer Privacy Litigation. In his order, the judge also gave the plaintiffs leave to submit a third amended complaint with the remaining claims in the smartphone class action lawsuit.

The smartphone privacy class action lawsuit originally filed against Carrier IQ Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., HTC Corp., and various other mobile phone manufacturers last year alleges that these telecom companies violated the Wiretap Act by illegally collecting consumer data via the plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ cell phones.

The plaintiffs allege this Wiretap Act violation was achieved by a software program designed by Carrier IQ and later altered and installed by the other defending telecom companies’ phones. According to the smartphone privacy class action lawsuit, the software allegedly collects and transfers sensitive date from consumers’ phones services by various carriers.

However, U.S. District Judge Edward M. Chen dismissed the plaintiffs’ Wiretap Act claims on Jan. 21, finding the “Wiretap Act claim is dismissed for failure to allege that the Device Manufacturers intentionally intercepted any communication as defined by the Wiretap Act,” according to the order partially dismissing the smartphone class action lawsuit.

In addition to the Wiretap Act claim dismissal, Judge Chen also found that the plaintiffs had not sufficiently alleged the following claims in their smartphone privacy class action lawsuit, and dismissed the following claims: Wiretap Act claims; California Penal Code § 502 claims; California implied warranty claims; Song-Beverly Act claim; Unfair Competition Law claim; Connecticut Unlawful Trade Practices Act claims; Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act claims; Washington Consumer Protection Act claims against HTC; and implied warranty claims in the states of Maryland, Michigan, and Texas.

Although these claims in the smartphone privacy class action lawsuit were denied, Judge Chen has given the plaintiffs and their legal counsel leave to amend the complaint and resubmit it to California federal court.

The court also dismissed with prejudice the plaintiffs’ claims under Illinois Eavesdropping Law and the plaintiffs will not be given leave to resubmit this claim in an amended smartphone privacy class action lawsuit complaint.

Judge Chen’s order states, “Plaintiffs’ third consolidated amended complaint shall be filed by March 23, 2015.”

The plaintiffs are represented by Joseph H. Malley of Law Office of Joseph H. Malley PC, Steve W. Berman and Robert F. Lopez of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP and Bruce L. Simon, Daniel L. Warshaw and William J. Newsom of Pearson Simon & Warshaw LLP, and others.

The Smartphone Privacy Class Action Lawsuit is In re: Carrier IQ Inc. Consumer Privacy Litigation, Case No. C-12-md-2330 EMC, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

UPDATE: On Jan. 15, 2016, the plaintiffs asked for a deadline extension for filing a settlement agreement. In the court document it states that all parties have agreed to the terms of the smartphone privacy class action settlement but were unable to get the signatures needed by Jan. 15. The parties anticipate that by Jan. 22, 2016 all signatures will be collected.  

UPDATE 2: On Jan. 22, 2016, the plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary settlement approval and class certification in the case In re: Carrier IQ Inc. Consumer Privacy Litigation. Nearly 79 million tablet and smartphone owners will be covered by the proposed deal, which will provide $9 million in monetary relief to affected consumers and certain injunctive relief, if approved.

UPDATE 3: On Mar. 1, 2016, a California federal judge granted preliminary approval of the $9 million smartphone privacy class action lawsuit settlement.

UPDATE 4: On Apr. 6, 2016, the Smartphone Privacy Class Action Settlement is now open! Click here to file a Claim Form or visit www.CarrieriQSettlement.com for more details.

UPDATE 5: On June 23, 2016, consumers in this privacy class action lawsuit against several tablet and smartphone makers urged a California federal court to accept a settlement that would resolve allegations that the companies installed wiretapping software on mobile devices.

UPDATE 6: On Oct. 1, 2018, Top Class Actions viewers started receiving checks from the Smartphone privacy class action settlementworth as much as $417. Congratulations to everyone who file a claim and got PAID!