Illinois Judge Denies Class Certification in Hotel Workers’ Biometric Privacy Lawsuit Against Unifocus

An Illinois federal judge has denied class certification in a case involving hotel workers who accused software provider Unifocus of violating the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). The ruling prevents the case from proceeding as a class action lawsuit, adding to a growing body of significant BIPA-related decisions in Illinois courts.

The plaintiffs, a group of hotel workers, alleged that Unifocus had violated BIPA’s provisions regarding the protection of biometric data, such as fingerprints or facial scans used in time and attendance systems. The judge’s decision to deny class certification centered primarily on concerns about the lead plaintiff, whom the court characterized as a “figurehead plaintiff,” suggesting inadequate representation of the proposed class.

This ruling follows a series of major developments in Illinois’ biometric privacy landscape, including significant amendments to BIPA signed into law by Governor J.B. Pritzker in August 2024. These amendments marked the first substantial changes to the law since its enactment in 2008, responding to concerns from businesses facing potentially devastating liability under the original statute.

The 2024 amendments introduced key changes to BIPA’s implementation, including limitations on damages by establishing that multiple collections of the same person’s biometric data constitute a single violation. This change directly addressed concerns raised by previous court decisions that had interpreted each scan as a separate violation. The law now also explicitly recognizes electronic signatures as valid for written consent, addressing a previously contested aspect of BIPA compliance that had generated substantial litigation.

Without class certification, affected hotel workers must now pursue individual claims against Unifocus if they seek remedies for alleged BIPA violations. This requirement significantly alters the litigation landscape, as individual claims typically involve smaller damages and may be less attractive to plaintiffs’ attorneys than class actions that could potentially result in larger settlements.

The interpretation of these amendments remains under active legal discussion, particularly regarding their application to pending cases. A federal judge in the Northern District of Illinois has ruled that the amendments apply to all unsettled cases, though this interpretation faces challenges in at least two ongoing cases.

The amendments have prompted shifts in BIPA litigation patterns, with some federal courts dismissing cases that no longer meet monetary thresholds for federal jurisdiction under the new damage limitations. The changes have also led to a reduction in single-plaintiff BIPA lawsuits seeking individual damages, marking a significant shift in the landscape of biometric privacy litigation in Illinois.

Sources: Law360

–

December 11, 2024 – by Cass Kennedy