READING BETWEEN THE PIXELS: Court Dismisses CIPA Claim Over Tracking Tools

Hi CIPAWorld! My name is Yara and I am one week old. Today we have a new Central District of California decision that provides additional guidance on what plaintiffs must actually allege to turn website tracking into a viable § 631(a) claim.

In Firlej v. Petrosian Esthetic Enters., LLC, No. 2:26-cv-01030-MWC-AGR, 2026 WL 2575938 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 31, 2026), Plaintiff Hania Rouhani alleged that tracking pixels and third-party cookies captured sensitive, personally identifiable information, including ‘Sensitive Health Information’ (“SHI”), and transmitted information to Google without her knowledge when she used SEV Laser Aesthetics’ website to schedule a laser appointment.

But this was not Rouhani’s first bite at the apple. Rouhani originally brought six causes of action against Defendants, including a claim under CIPA § 631(a). On June 18, 2026, the Court dismissed her CIPA claim with leave to amend. While the Court found that Rouhani plausibly alleged that the Tracking Tools