Alfred Saikali of Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P. writes: Yesterday, in a 26-page opinion, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has weighed in on two important questions in the world of privacy and data breach litigation. First, does a plaintiff have standing where he was exposed to a substantial risk of future identity theft, even though there was no misuse of his information. The court’s answer is no. Second, what efforts to mitigate this risk does a plaintiff need to undertake to meet the standing requirement. Here, the court held that the plaintiff essentially manufactured his own injuries (wasted time, lost use of his preferred card, and lost credit card benefits) by voluntarily canceling his credit card, which is not enough to confer standing. Read more about the case and opinion in Tsao v. Captiva MVP Restaurant Partners on JDSupra.DataBreaches.netRead More
- Is big tech now just too big to stomach?
- How the United States Lost to Hackers