Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Leaderboard Analytics
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
Nosal v. Rich Products Corporation
Case Number:
1:20-cv-04972
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Multi Party Litigation:
Class Action
Judge:
Firms
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
April 18, 2024
$550K Fingerprint BIPA Deal Receives Ill. Judge's Initial OK
An Illinois federal judge gave his early blessing Wednesday to a nearly $550,000 settlement between global food supplier Rich Products Corp. and hundreds of current and former employees who claimed the company illegally collected and used their scanned fingerprint data.
-
August 22, 2023
Food Giant Can't Escape BIPA Suit Over Fingerprint Collecting
An Illinois federal judge on Tuesday ruled that Rich Products Corp. must face a proposed class action alleging the food supplier improperly stored employees' fingerprints in violation of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, saying recent rulings from the state Supreme Court have resolved several key issues in the case.
-
October 06, 2020
Food Giant Says BIPA Suit Barred By Ill. Labor Law
Rich Products Corp. is urging an Illinois federal judge to throw out allegations it violated the state's biometric privacy law, saying the claims are preempted by the state workers' compensation statute despite a recent appellate court ruling that rejected that argument.