Privacy class action over genetic data moves forward

A federal judge agreed with the plaintiffs that the disclosure of their DNA profiles to law enforcement against their wishes was a substantial invasion of their privacy.(CN) — A federal judge on Wednesday waved portions of a class action by people who say a San Diego-based operator of a genealogical research site allowed third parties, including Meta and law enforcement, access to their DNA profile without their permission.U.S. District Judge James Simmons Jr. partially denied a motion to dismiss the claims by Verogen Inc. and Qiagen NV, a European multinational that acquired GEDmatch.com in 2023.The judge said the plaintiffs can proceed with their claims that pertain to a purported technical loophole in GEDmatch’s PRO platform, which allowed law enforcement users to circumvent the opt-out privacy setting and run comparisons against profiles of users who had specifically restricted such access.“Unauthorized access to genetic profiles by law enforcement actors, against users’ expressed preferences, presents at the very least, a substantial privacy invasion,” Simmons, a Joe Biden appointee, wrote.The plaintiffs can also move forward on their claims that pertain to Meta’s tracking pixel. The plaintiffs claim Verogen installed the pixel on GEDmatch.com in 2020 and that it was configured to capture page views and, at certain times, DNA kit upload events, and transmit user activity data, including their Facebook ID numbers, to Meta.The judge restricted those claims to users who uploaded their DNA after the Meta pixel had been incorporated on the website.But with regard to the sale of Verogen to Qiagen in 2023, Simmons wasn’t persuaded that the plaintiffs had stated a legally sufficient claim that their privacy was violated by any commercial endeavors following the change of ownership.“The court agrees with defendants that these allegations, as presently pled, do not adequately connect Qiagen’s acquisition and post-acquisition conduct to a prohibited disclosure, retention, or use of the named plaintiffs’ specific genetic information,” he said.“Here, the [second amended complaint] does not allege with the requisite particularity that any term of the acquisition agreement mandated a prohibited disclosure of each named plaintiff’s protected genetic information, or that Qiagen’s post-acquisition commercial activities specifically involved access to or use of the named plaintiffs’ individual DNA profiles,” Simmons added.The judge allowed to amend their complaint to fix the shortcomings he found in the dismissed claims.Attorneys for Verogen and for the plaintiffs didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.At a hearing last November, Verogen’s and Qiagen’s attorneys asked Simmons to dismiss the case on procedural grounds, saying that the users hadn’t showed how they were harmed by any potential disclosures.The management of Verogen’s genetic database never changed after the sale, Kristine Argentine, a Chicago-based attorney of Seyfarth Shaw, argued for the defendants. Much of her argument relied on the claim that Verogen’s client data remained in the original company’s control.“They uploaded their information to be shared with other users of the website,” she told Simmons. “None of that changed. The use of the information was still exactly the same.”She also said that the clients agreed to Verogen’s terms and conditions, which mentions the possibility of a sale to another entity.The 10 named plaintiffs in the lawsuit point to the developing legal framework governing genetic data in their home states — Alaska, Illinois, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Oregon — as the legal basis for their claims against Verogen. Each of these state laws prohibits the collection, disclosure or use of genetic information without the individual’s consent.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads