The judge also rejected Redd’s argument that her claims aren’t causally connected to Amazon’s thermal camera use, and that they stem instead from the company’s failure to follow BIPA’s informed consent requirements to use it. While the Seventh Circuit hasn’t considered the meaning of “arising out of” or “relating to” in the statute, the appellate court has found in other contexts that it is broad, he said.
Still, Amazon’s camera use clearly “played some role in bringing about or contributing to [Redd’s] injury,” Judge Harjani said, quoting Ninth Circuit precedent on this issue. If Amazon hadn’t ever used its cameras, “the issue of consent would be moot,” he said.
“Thus, the use of the cameras is a key nexus to Redd’s claim, and ultimately contributed to the injury and the alleged privacy violation that she claims she suffered,” the judge said.
The suit, which a different worker originally filed in state court, alleged Amazon implemented facial geometry scans and temperature checks as prerequisites for employees to enter its warehouses.
