Sterk v. Redbox Automated Retail, LLC
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 4570
| 7th Cir. | 2012Background
- Redbox seeks interlocutory review under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) of whether §2710(e) destruction claims may be pursued as damages under §2710(c).
- The district court held that a damages remedy under §2710(c) can be invoked for violations of §2710(e).
- The amended complaint added a §2710(b)(1) disclosure claim alleging Knowingly discloses PII, alongside the destruction claim.
- The court discusses the statutory structure of the Video Privacy Protection Act and whether damages lie for non-disclosure harms like failure to destroy information.
- The Seventh Circuit reverses the district court, concluding damages under §2710(c) are tied to the disclosure prohibition, not to destruction of records.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Can §2710(c) damages apply to §2710(e) destruction | Sterk argues damages may be awarded for destruction under §2710(e). | Redbox contends damages are limited to unlawful disclosures under §2710(b). | Damages under §2710(c) do not extend to §2710(e) destruction; damages lie with disclosure. |
| Whether the interlocutory appeal under §1292(b) may be granted | Appeal presents a controlling question of law with substantial difference of opinion and may advance termination. | Opposes interlocutory appeal as premature or unnecessary if other grounds exist. | The appeal is allowed; it may materially advance termination of the litigation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Daniel v. Cantrell, 375 F.3d 377 (6th Cir.2004) (interpretation of §2710(c) scope)
- Doe v. Chao, 540 U.S. 614 (U.S. 2004) (injury requirement for statutory damages emphasized)
- Pace Communications, Inc. v. Moonlight Design, Inc., 31 F.3d 587 (7th Cir.1994) (liquidated damages are estimates of actual damages)
- McFarlin v. Conseco Services, LLC, 381 F.3d 1251 (11th Cir.2004) (interlocutory appeal standards under §1292(b))
- In re Baker & Getty Financial Services, Inc., 954 F.2d 1169 (6th Cir.1992) (§1292(b) considerations)
- White v. Nix, 43 F.3d 374 (8th Cir.1994) (section 1292(b) may be satisfied when appeal may advance termination)