Judge Stays Meta BIPA Class Action Pending Certification of Choice-of-Law Ruling

EDWARDSVILLE (LN) — U.S. District Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on Wednesday stayed the case against Meta Platforms, ruling the proceedings should pause while the Seventh Circuit resolves whether to accept Meta’s request for immediate appellate review of a ruling that Illinois law, not California law, governs the social media company’s user agreements.

The stay comes after Rosenstengel denied Meta’s motion for summary judgment in February on the specific ground of choice of law, rejecting the company’s argument that a choice-of-law clause in its terms of service mandated the application of California law to the plaintiffs’ claims under the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act.

Meta immediately moved to certify that ruling for interlocutory appellate review under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), arguing the decision created an “analytical conflict” in Seventh Circuit precedent that required immediate resolution by the appellate court.

In the May 13 order, Rosenstengel acknowledged the “analytical conflict” between two Seventh Circuit decisions: Stromberg Metal Works, Inc. v. Press Mech., Inc., which suggests choice-of-law clauses are enforceable if the issue is contractual, and Smurfit Newsprint Corp. v. Se. Paper Mfg., which allows courts to disregard such clauses if they violate fundamental Illinois public policy.

“The Court stands firmly behind this decision,” Rosenstengel wrote regarding her February ruling, “but... it is incorrect to suggest that Meta has no likelihood of success on the merits of its argument that the choice of law provision at issue should be strictly enforced.”

The judge noted that if the Seventh Circuit adopts the Stromberg framework, the outcome of Meta’s summary judgment motion “may be different,” potentially ending the case before it proceeds to substantive discovery.

Rosenstengel rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the stay would cause irreparable harm, noting the case is already over two and a half years old and that a delay is “a concomitant of its complexity.”

She added that a reversal by the Seventh Circuit would benefit the plaintiffs by saving them “the expense of additional years of litigation,” while an affirmation would allow them to proceed with the “leverage of having knocked out a potentially significant issue on appeal.”

The stay remains in effect until the Seventh Circuit issues a decision on Meta’s motion to certify the choice-of-law ruling for interlocutory review.