Apr 292024

A New Wave of Class Actions: The Genetic Information Privacy Act

Kathleen Carlson, Lawrence P. Fogel, Colleen Theresa Brown, Andrew F. Rodheim and Michael J. Willian
, ,

Largely dormant for the last 25 years, Illinois’ Genetic Information Privacy Act (GIPA) has been sharing the limelight recently with its sibling, the Biometric Information Privacy Act. (BIPA). GIPA includes a number of restrictions related to the use and disclosure of genetic testing and genetic information, and it provides a private right of action and permits recovery of steep statutory damages. In 2023 alone, over 50 GIPA complaints were filed, and new suits continue to be filed in 2024. In this article, published on AML Law.com, Sidley lawyers Kathleen Carlson, Lawrence Fogel, and Colleen Brown explore some of GIPA’s emerging issues and unanswered questions.

View article here.

This post is as of the posting date stated above. Sidley Austin LLP assumes no duty to update this post or post about any subsequent developments having a bearing on this post.

Kathleen Carlson

Chicago

kathleen.carlson@sidley.com

Lawrence P. Fogel

Chicago

lawrence.fogel@sidley.com

Colleen Theresa Brown

Washington, D.C.

cbrown@sidley.com

Andrew F. Rodheim

Chicago

arodheim@sidley.com

Michael J. Willian

Chicago

mwillian@sidley.com

You might also like
Regulatory Update: National Association of Insurance Commissioners Spring 2024 National Meeting

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) held its Spring 2024 National Meeting (Spring Meeting) March 15 through 18, 2024. This Sidley Update summarizes the highlights from this meeting in addition to interim meetings held in lieu of taking place during the Spring Meeting. Highlights include proposed updates to the regulatory review process for affiliated investment management agreements, continued discussion of considerations related to private equity ownership of insurers, and continued development of accounting principles and investment limitations related to certain types of bonds and structured securities.

District Court Finds Communications Decency Act Provides Automotive Device Manufacturer Immunity for Clean Air Act Violations

On March 28, 2024, in US v. EZ Lynk, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) claim that an automotive device manufacturer violated Section 203 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), holding that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) provided complete immunity from CAA liability for the sale of certain aftermarket automotive devices. This decision of first impression offers an important precedent in the automotive industry and beyond. The decision gives effect to the CDA as drafted and will make it significantly harder for the government to hold manufacturers and online retailers liable for content, including software, created and sold by third parties.

Cybersecurity Takeaways From White House Tech Report

On Feb. 26, the White House’s Office of the National Cyber Director (ONCD), released a report on how technology manufacturers and software developers can improve the cybersecurity posture of the U.S. This report, “Back to the Building Blocks: A Path Toward Secure and Measurable Software,” aligns with the Biden administration’s current, intense focus on combatting ever-increasing cyberthreats through software development and software manufacturer accountability. In this article, published by Law360 on March 26, Sidley lawyers Alan Charles Raul, Stephen McInerney and Vishnu Tirumala discuss the ONCD report and provide key take-aways for software developers and manufacturers, their senior management, and boards.