Judge approves $27.5 million settlement against Thomson Reuters for selling Californians’ personal data

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — A federal judge gave final approval Friday morning to a $27.5 million settlement resolving claims that Thomson Reuters collected millions of California residents’ personal and confidential information and then sold access to it without their knowledge or consent.

People living in California since Dec. 3, 2016, were qualified to file for relief, with most expected to receive between $19 and $48 from the settlement. The deadline to file for relief was Dec. 6, 2024. However, since fewer than 1% of the class actually filed a claim — to the disappointment of the presiding judge — those who did file are likely to receive a much higher payout from the fund, which also covers attorneys’ fees and a payment to the named plaintiffs leading the case.

The class action stems from a 2020 lawsuit brought by Cat Brook and Rasheed Shabazz, who claimed that Thomson Reuters, best known for its news agency Reuters, was using its CLEAR platform to collect millions of Californians’ photos, data and other personal information without their consent and selling it. CLEAR is a research and investigative tool designed to help professionals — especially those in law enforcement, government, legal work and corporate security — conduct public records research.

Brooks founded the Anti-Police Terror Project, an Oakland-based, Black-led grassroots coalition focused on ending police violence and state-sanctioned oppression, particularly against Black and other marginalized communities. She says she became a target of white supremacist groups because of her activism and was worried about her personal identity being shared.

Brooks claimed CLEAR violated the California Consumer Privacy Act, which requires companies to disclose the sale of a person’s personal information to third parties.

Though Thomson Reuters argued during litigation that there is a public benefit to publishing the information collected with CLEAR, U.S. Senior District Judge Edward Chen ultimately rejected that reasoning and denied the company’s motion to dismiss

Chen, a Barack Obama appointee, said Friday’s hearing that he was disappointed less than 1% of people had submitted claims. He asked plaintiffs’ attorney Andre Muran if anything more could have been done to stimulate participation; Mura replied that he felt Angeion Group, which handled the notice of the settlement, did the best it could.

Mura listed some of the efforts to draw claimants: “We retained a social media influencer to provide notice — that way, we had more targeted ads on social media. We had an extended claims period … We also had a listing in ‘Top Class Actions.’"

“Some of these things are difficult to measure in terms of reach, but we are confident that the notice was well-handled by Angeion and that good efforts were made,” Mura said.

Mura added that while the number was lower than what he’d hoped for when the settlement got preliminary approval, it was still within an acceptable range.

Chen awarded $6.875 million in attorneys’ fees as part of the settlement, noting that the case took a lot of time and effort to get to the settlement stage and then to push it over the finish line.

“The actual claims rate is disappointing, but it appears to me that this is a difficult case. This is not a case where there was any access to emails or physical addresses, so direct notice could not be given, and the class is a wide and somewhat amorphous class. So this is not just a class of folks who bought a particular product or have expressed a particular interest or engage in some particular activity, where you kind of focus in on it,” Chen said.

“Here, it’s really the general population. And so while disappointing, it does appear to me that all reasonable efforts were made to get notice to the class and so, in the end, the amount to be distributed remains the same.”

Because fewer people submitted claims than was originally projected, Chen said those who filed will get more money.

Finally, Chen awarded $5,000 each to Brooks and Shabazz from the settlement fund in recognition of the time, effort, and expense they incurred pursuing the case, which ultimately benefited the entire class.

Thomson Reuters’ counsel, Susan Fahringer, remained silent during the hearing except to tell Chen she had no objection to the settlement.