Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

Kashkeesh v. Microsoft Corp.

Kashkeesh v. Microsoft Corp.

United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

June 29, 2022, Decided; June 29, 2022, Filed

21 C 3229

Opinion

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Emad Kashkeesh and Michael Komorski brought this putative class action in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, against Microsoft Corporation, alleging violations of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act ("BIPA"), 740 ILCS 14/1 et seq. Doc. 1-1. Microsoft removed the suit to federal court, Doc. 1, and Plaintiffs move to remand two of their claims back to state court, Doc. 36. The motion is granted.

Background

Plaintiffs are former Uber drivers who worked primarily in Chicago. Doc. 28 at ¶¶ 32, 38. Upon registering as Uber drivers, each was required to submit his name, vehicle information, driver's license, and a profile picture to Uber through [*2]  its mobile application. Id. ¶¶ 23, 32, 38. To gain access to Uber's platform and commence his driving duties, each had to photograph his face in real time through Uber's "Real Time ID Check" security feature. Id. at ¶¶ 33, 39. Unbeknownst to Plaintiffs, their pictures were transferred to Microsoft's Face Application Programming Interface ("Face API"), which is integrated into Uber's phone application as a security feature. Id. at ¶¶ 23-25. Microsoft's Face API collected and analyzed Plaintiffs' facial biometrics to create a "geographic template" that it compared to the geographic template from the original profile picture to verify their identities. Id. at ¶¶ 25-26, 34, 40.

Microsoft never obtained Plaintiffs' written consent to capture, store, or disseminate their facial biometrics. Id. at ¶¶ 28, 35, 41. Microsoft also failed to make a publicly available policy regarding retention and deletion of their biometric information, and it profited from receiving that information. Id. at ¶¶ 29-30, 36, 42.

Discussion

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114930 *; 2022 WL 2340876

EMAD KASHKEESH and MICHAEL KOMORSKI, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, Plaintiffs, vs. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant.

Subsequent History: Motion denied by Kashkeesh v. Microsoft Corp., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 227262 (N.D. Ill., Dec. 13, 2022)

CORE TERMS

biometric, federal court, state court, lack standing, retention, concrete