District Judge Overturns Previous Ruling; Re-Opens BIPA Case
A judge for the U.S. District for Northern Illinois on Monday scrapped a previous ruling in a case about a company collecting biometrics of its employees, claiming instead that the amendment to the Biometric Information Privacy Act does not apply retroactively, reopening case 24-01925.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
"Because upon further consideration, I am persuaded that the better interpretation of the amendment is that it effected a change in the law, I grant" the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, said Judge Elaine Bucklo. "Because the change [the amendment] effected is substantive and the legislature did not expressly provide that it would apply retroactively, I conclude that it applies only prospectively." Accordingly, the plaintiffs' BIPA claim is "governed by the version of the statute in effect at the time his complaint was filed, and his alleged damages satisfy the jurisdictional minimum."
Bucklo ruled in November that the amendment applied retroactively in Gregg v. Central Transport LLC. Confusion around the amendment will linger until a higher court rules on it, privacy lawyers said (see 2502210037).
In the complaint filed in March 2024, plaintiffs Rahsaan Edwards and John Gregg alleged Central Transport required them to enroll in a biometric system when they were hired and their data was collected when clocking in and out. However, the company failed to inform them about why their biometric data was collected and how long it would store it. Moreover, the employees allege they never signed a written form consenting to collection of their biometric information.