8th Circ. Won’t Revive Charter Communications Privacy Class Action

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has put an end to a class action lawsuit alleging Charter Communications Inc. unlawfully stored customers’ personal identifiable information even after they cancelled their services.

This conduct allegedly violates the Cable Communications Policy Act, which governs the collection, dissemination and destruction of cable subscribers’ personal information.

A three-judge appellate panel agreed with a Missouri federal court, finding that the U.S. Supreme Court holding in Spokeo Inc. v. Robins required a plaintiff to allege “concrete” harm in order to have standing to bring a suit. The panel found that plaintiff Alex Braitberg failed to meet this standard.

“With the benefit of Spokeo’s guidance, we conclude that Braitberg has not alleged an injury in fact as required by Article III,” the appellate panel writes. “His complaint asserts a ‘bare procedural violation, divorced from any concrete harm.’”

In May, the Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs must prove they suffered both “concrete and particularized” injury when they bring a lawsuit alleging violation of a consumer protection law.

Braitberg’s privacy class action lawsuit accused Charter Communications of violating the Cable Communications Policy Act by keeping his personal information on file after he cancelled their services and even after the information was no longer necessary to satisfy any tax or legal obligations.

The Charter Communications class action lawsuit was dismissed by the Missouri federal court, which disagreed with Braitberg’s assertion that it wasn’t necessary to show he suffered an “actual injury” because Charter violated his federally protected privacy rights.

Braitberg also asserted that this statutory violation caused him financial harm because it diminished the value of the services he received.

According to the Charter Communications class action lawsuit, consumers place value on protecting their personal data against unauthorized use. The fact that Charter Communications retained this information after it was no longer necessary allegedly put his data at risk and deprived him of the full value of the services he paid for.

Even though Braitberg argued that Charter Communications violated his statutory rights to privacy, he never alleged that Charter used his personal information for any purpose, such as disclosing the information to a third party.

Therefore, the appellate panel found that Braitberg failed to adequately allege there was any effect on the value of the services he paid for.

“He identifies no material risk of harm from the retention; a speculative or hypothetical risk is insufficient,” the appellate panel wrote. “Although there is a common-law tradition of lawsuits for invasion of privacy, the retention of information unlawfully obtained, without further disclosure, traditionally has not provided the basis for a lawsuit in American courts.”

Braitberg is represented by Joseph J. Siprut of Siprut PC and Anthony G. Simon and Ryan A. Keane of the Simon Law Firm PC.

The Charter Communications Privacy Class Action Lawsuit is Braitberg v. Charter Communications Inc., Case No. 14-1737, in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.