Popa v. PSP Group LLC
Summary
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided Popa v. PSP Group LLC, holding that plaintiffs lacked Article III standing to challenge routine session-replay/website-tracking where no embarrassing, intimate, or historically protected sensitive information was collected. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief urging dismissal under the Pennsylvania Wiretap Act. The opinion is dated August 26, 2025.
Litigation Status
Procedural Posture
Appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (docket 24-14); Ninth Circuit issued a decision resolving standing.
Reported Holding
The Ninth Circuit held that plaintiffs lacked Article III standing to challenge routine tracking of consumer website interactions when that tracking did not involve collection of embarrassing, intimate, or sensitive information historically protected by common-law privacy torts.
What the Court Decided
That plaintiffs lacked Article III standing to challenge routine website-tracking/session-replay interactions absent collection of embarrassing, intimate, or other historically protected sensitive information.
What the Court Did Not Decide
Because the court resolved the case on standing grounds, it did not address the merits of the underlying Pennsylvania Wiretap Act claim.
Significance
Generally viewed as defense-favorable. Characterizations of significance describe how the matter has generally been discussed in tracked public sources; individual holdings are often narrow, procedural, or fact-specific, and this page does not state or imply broader holdings than the sources support.
What This Page Does and Does Not Say
This page reports what our tracked public sources say about this matter — including, where identified, the procedural posture (for example, a ruling on a motion to dismiss is not a final merits decision). It does not report legal conclusions beyond those sources, does not predict outcomes, and does not constitute legal advice.
Technologies at Issue
- session-replay technology
- website tracking
Third parties named or identified in tracked sources: PSP Group LLC.
Statutes Invoked
- Pennsylvania Wiretap Act
Claims Asserted
- Pennsylvania Wiretap Act claim
What This Matter May Mean for Website Operators
For operators using similar technologies, the recurring factual questions in matters like this one are when session recording begins relative to consent and whether input masking covers every field. Our scanner tests these behaviors empirically.
The reported outcome direction at the standing stage reflects how tracked sources characterize the ruling; such rulings are often narrow, posture-specific, and fact-bound rather than broad statements of law.
Detection of a similar technology on a website is an informational risk indicator, not a legal conclusion, and nothing in this section is legal advice.
Related Intelligence
Sources
About This Page
Publisher: Inspection-Ready Institute, Inc. (DBA Crandall Consulting), an independent website compliance and risk consultancy. We are not a law firm and nothing on this page is legal advice.
How this content is produced: Facts are extracted from publicly available sources — court and government materials, recognized legal press, professional analysis, and industry reports — by our litigation intelligence engine, stored with full source provenance, and rendered from the database. Risk guidelines are computed by a deterministic formula, never by an AI model directly. See the full methodology.
Limitations: Counts labeled "Tracked" reflect matters identified in our source set and are not official court statistics. We report what courts decided and did not decide; we do not predict outcomes.
Corrections: If you believe anything on this page is inaccurate, contact us via the contact page and we will review the underlying sources promptly.
Is Your Website Creating Hidden Tracking Risk?
Scan your site for third-party tracking and potential wiretap exposure. Free, no account required.
Scan My Website