So, you’re one of the millions of people out of work. It’s hard and you’re likely experiencing the stages of grief. It’s emotional, and you are not alone. Our jobs contribute to our personal identities, and when drastic changes happen due to external circumstances, it impacts us in many ways.

The current global situation reminds us that the only constant is change. When you are ready to get back in the game, know that new opportunities await! Everything happens for a reason, and with each door that closes, a new one opens.

How do you find that so-called “open door”–or should I say, the right open door–for you? Review potential questions you may have and answers/ideas to combat the hurdles and uncertainties that may enter your brain as you get back into the job hunt:

“I don’t see any jobs open right now that actually fall into my interests and expertise. What do I do?”

This time is a gift. Use it to boost your resume with online certifications, education, and e-learning. Is there something you’ve been itching to learn more about? Master some Google tools with Google’s Skillshop, or check out Centro’s Digital Media Essentials training here. Self-improvement, one of Centro’s core principles, is a lifelong endeavor. The more skills you showcase, the more appealing you’ll be to recruiters, and the more confident you’ll feel overall.

“I’m interviewing but nobody even wants me. I should just give up.”

Never give up! Keep practicing storytelling, pitching, and articulating your skill set—you can have all the accolades in the world and the most pristine experience on-paper, but you need to be able to weave and tell a compelling personal story! You may be in a tough spot, but do you still showcase a positive attitude? How are you persevering through adversity to leverage your unique skill set? Own YOUR story, make it special, and perfect the way you share it.

“I’ve been out of practice. The thought of interviewing after all this time scares me. How can I get some practice before the “real” thing?”

Interviewing can be scary. You are being evaluated and for lack of a better word, “judged,” based on a piece of paper and first impression. But remember, just as you are being evaluated—you are equally evaluating the employer. This must be a two-way street to ensure compatibility. In order to “dust off the rust” and feel prepped and confident, ask a trusted professional and/or friend to quiz you virtually with questions.

Practice telling your stories and answering questions on-the-fly. Since interviewing will be done virtually for the foreseeable future, this helps you articulate your accomplishments proficiently, via webcam. Don’t forget to also check out interview tips from the pros, such as LinkedIn’s recent article about the “6 Interview Skills that Will Get You Hired” or these remote interviewing tips.

“I’ve gotten an offer, but the pay is way lower than the standard I have set for myself. They said when crisis mode ends, things will change, but how can I trust that’s the case?”

The economy is currently in struggle. Trust that you have worth but remember to look at the opportunity as a whole and not just the salary. Ask questions about health plans and other benefits, work flexibility, mental health support, family programs, growth opportunities, office culture, etc. Take time to sit down and consider what’s most important in your life.

“I’m sending out resumes everywhere but I’m getting no responses.”

Reset your expectations. Don’t abandon career goals, hopes, and dreams. Instead, think about what other jobs fall within your wheelhouse of skills and interests. The job market may not be ideal, but an unlikely opportunity could turn into something you never knew you wanted or push you into learning something new.

“What good does networking do me if the people I’m talking to aren’t in the position to hire someone? Also, how do I network when I’m quarantined…?”

Networking is always your friend. Check out what Goldman Sach’s recruiters have to say about networking and events during uncertain times. Set up networking conversations and manage your time wisely. This is an opportunity to learn more about someone, what they do, the company they are at, etc.

If the conversation goes in a direction that potentially solidifies your desire to work at their company, or in their line of work, it never hurts to ask them to keep you in mind when their company begins hiring.

You can say something similar to, “I know you aren’t hiring currently and I’m fully aware of the challenges companies are facing at this time with COVID-19, but if you hear anything in the industry or at your company about a need to hire someone with my skill set, please do keep me in mind.” A shameless plug can lead to a world of opportunity. After your initial conversation, don’t forget to keep in touch to keep yourself top of mind! A thank you note for their time will go a long way.

Make a list of people in your network. If you’re a recent grad, think about your favorite professors, or any professionals you respect, are comfortable with and look up to. Think of old internship supervisors, old managers, coworkers, pals that are employed, family members, friends, friends of friends of friends, etc.—make a personal goal to reach out to a certain number of people per day.

How does this look virtually? Seek out connections on LinkedIn or reach out via email. Be clear and specific with your ask—why are you reaching out, how are you, connected, and how much time are you asking for? Then, you can Zoom call, Facetime, or call them via phone. We are lucky to have a multitude of ways to connect with people even when it can’t be in-person at the nearest Starbucks. Make it happen!

Looking to explore more interviewing, networking, digital resources, and more? Centro’s here for you! Check out our blog or connect with us via our Centro Prep Facebook Community.

You are going to overcome this challenge, and we are all going to make it to the other side of this pandemic with an amazing story to tell! Take some deep breaths, hang in there, and stay well!

The year 2020 will likely be remembered as the point of origin for a massive change in the e-commerce landscape. Brick and mortar locations closed their doors, and consumer shopping habits changed overnight in the wake of the novel coronavirus. Businesses that sell their products online, understandably, felt the sudden pang of anxiety over the unknown implications of a national shelter in place mandate.

The following weeks have seen a roller coaster of market shifts, vague announcements from industry leaders like Amazon & Walmart about the distinction between essential vs nonessential products, and uncertainty around fulfillment bandwidth nationwide. Logical Media Group partners with companies representing a variety of industries and products, some deemed essential and some not. COVID-19 has changed the nature of our relationship with our clients, as each day presents new questions and concerns about the viability of driving revenue through digital marketing.

Effects of Coronavirus on Logical Media Group E-Commerce Clients

Panic and anxiety have set the economic tone of the pandemic thus far, but for e-commerce companies there has been another side of the coin, and a shiny one at that. In reviewing March and April performance data, Logical has seen an overwhelmingly positive impact for our e-commerce clients. Within the Grocery & Gourmet category, we have seen a four digit (2,000% +) increase in revenue on Google Advertising. Food that can be delivered to your door was always going to be the big winner here, though. See how other categories are fairing below:

* Data pulled from Logical Media Group Google Advertising MCC

This chart represents the change in performance trends in Google Advertising spend alone for Logical Media Group e-commerce clients, organized by category, between March 15th, 2020 – April 27th, 2020 compared to January 31st, 2020 – March 14th, 2020. The boost is substantial for groceries, but our clients in every industry have experienced growth in purchases and revenue. The consistent decrease in Average Order Value is indicative of a change in consumer purchasing habits, with shoppers making smaller purchases more frequently. This could be attributed to more conversative spending choices, or a wait-and-see approach to shelter in place policies.Another thing to note is Logical clients in the Grocery and Dietary Supplements began offering free shipping at the onset of quarantine, lowering the average AOV.

* Data pulled from Logical Media Group Google Advertising MCC

Here is the same client data now organized by the various “channels” within Google Advertising. Search and Shopping see positive growth, to be expected with the aforementioned spike in e-commerce conversion rates. Display ads, traditionally associated with top funnel brand awareness, have seen an unprecedented increase in purchases, revenue and AOV. Throw out all preconceived notions of what may or may not work for your business during the COVID pandemic — it is possible to achieve growth on any channel in any industry.Effects of Coronavirus Around the Industry In addition to our client success stories, we can look around the industry for expanded data sets. Bazaarvoice, an e-commerce thought leader, recently published data by category from their own customer data. You can see a dramatic increase in page views across categories that aren’t related to critical pandemic survival (e.g. groceries).

Of particular interest to e-commerce focused businesses will be their findings on actual order revenue within that same time period.

Categories that are seeing success aren’t necessarily the obvious ones, either. Hardware and Sporting goods have enjoyed substantial growth as consumer behavior shifts towards extended time at home. The anecdotal evidence behind this isn’t overly complicated: folks home from work are going to take the opportunity to work on their homes.

How to Plan for What’s Next

 There are a few other factors, most notably unemployment percentages and expendable income per household, that will determine the long-term scalability of investing ad dollars in this category. The good news is that ad investments are flexible and impermanent,  very much like a hot iron that requires striking when an opportunity presents itself.

 On April 13, Amazon lifted all shipping restrictions on nonessential inventory to allow third‑party sellers to resume sending inventory to its FBA warehouses. Additionally, Amazon has continued to issue new purchase orders after implying that nonessential PO’s would be halted. While Logical recommends practicality and caution in any investment strategy, consistent market monitoring is a part of the value we provide our clients. With two growing brands, both relatively new to the Amazon marketplace, an opportunity is upon us to make our mark. Our priorities for client are simple:

1. Optimize listing content to assist with category ranking improvement and consumer engagement
2. Drive sales and new customers through organic and paid advertising efforts, the second piece of category ranking improvement
3. Create a positive user experience, generate new reviews and return traffic, the third piece of the category ranking puzzle

Should You Keep Spending on Advertising?

 Ad spend will, of course, be used to generate a return, and the highest one possible at that. The secondary benefits, however, can’t be forgotten in this equation. Logical is proud to partner with Sellics,an industry leader in Amazon reporting and analysis tools. They break down the process by which Amazon determines category rankings into a much simpler concept: The Self-Perpetuating Flywheel.

Source: Sellics.com

Many factors are built into each of these heavily simplified flywheel portions, but the point is that Amazon and its algorithm smile upon brands that participate in all aspects of that flywheel. Putting ad dollars behind your product listings, generating sales and subsequent reviews are a crucial part of any growth strategy.

Final Thoughts

 The obstacles and potential pitfalls are well documented and will absolutely require consistent attention.

• Fulfillment and means of production
• Economic stability and presence of expendable income
• E-Retailer bandwidth
• Category limitations based on “essential status”

While these factors likely aren’t going anywhere, neither is our window of opportunity to introduce your brand to a brand new audience and fill your top funnel.

The role of e‑commerce, Amazon in particular, is currently as critical for the growth of digitally focused brands as it will ever be. Despite the uncertainty that clouds the entire marketplace, we have little reason to believe that the dramatic shift to online shopping will have anything other than a positive impact on marketplaces long term.

Amazon has taken steps to secure its fulfillment and supply chain operations by seeking to hire 100,000 new employees for their warehouses during the pandemic. If that light at the end of the tunnel isn’t bright enough, sellers which use FBA have once again been given approval to send inventory to Amazon warehouses nationwide on April 13th.  As operational functionality slowly stabilizes, Logical expects to see a sustained growth pattern in e-commerce marketing across all categories.

Per the cliché, “truth is stranger than fiction”, who could have predicted the catalyst to bring the longest bull market in recorded history to an abrupt about face would be a virus with a name synonymous with a popular imported beer. 

Just prior to the historic sell off, much attention was being focused on the recently passed SECURE Act which promises to change the landscape of today’s retirement plans over the coming years.  One of the provisions in the SECURE act involves an investment concept in existence for decades that has been rarely utilized by plan sponsors.  Known as “guaranteed income” programs, the SECURE Act provides  safe harbor protection for employers offering such a program in their retirement plans.

When the permanent pension was the norm, a retiree with a pension could know that a check was coming in every month for as long as they were alive.  Guaranteed income programs emulate these desirable features of the permanent  pension within a 401(k) plan.

Those who have chosen a program that provides the assurances of guaranteed income for life would likely be more inclined to stay the course and remain invested when the inevitable bear market occurs, confident  that their income in retirement would not be impacted during declines in the market.  Staying the course should lead to better long-term investment outcomes based upon historical data on the markets over the last three decades:  

Over the last 30 years through Friday, 3/20/20, an investor who missed the 10 best days of returns would have earned just 6.20% instead of 8.84% annualized over the 30-year period.  If the investor missed the best 30 days, they would have earned only 2.95%.  In missing the 30 best days, a dollar would have grown to just $2.39 instead of $12.67 by staying fully invested.  *-

Another reason to consider offering  guaranteed income programs in a 401(k) plan, is that they mitigate two key risks that retirees face:

1.       Sequence of return risk

2.       Longevity risk

Click on the following link to see an article that describes these two risks in detail: https://www.illinoistech.org/news/news.asp?id=490451.

For over three decades, as a Senior Retirement Plan Consultant, I have focused on assisting employers and their retirement plan participants to accumulate assets for their retirement. Call me today to discuss how guaranteed income programs, combined with the strength of UBS, can help assist your employees to retire with dignity and in the lifestyle that they envision. 

Direct: 847-277-2123

Email: thomas.kret@ubs.com

*Sources: Northern Trust Research, Bloomberg.  Charts show the annualized compound return and growth of $1 using daily return data on the S&P 500 Index over the past 30 years ending 03/20/2020 assuming the (0,5,10,20,30) best returning days are excluded from the sample.  

Chicago – May 19, 2020 — Centro (https://www.centro.net), a global provider of advertising technology, today announced the release of new products and upgrades that help advertisers with automation and visualization for campaign reporting, workflow management and forecasting. The advanced tools give brands and agencies more control of their campaigns. These are available in Centro’s Basis, the industry’s most comprehensive, automated, and intelligent digital media platform—and the only software solution of its kind to consolidate digital operations across programmatic, direct, search, and social campaigns. Learn more at https://www2.centro.net/basis.

Digital media professionals showcase results and prioritize actions through these product upgrades within Basis:

• Campaign Performance Presentation auto-generates a polished PowerPoint showing post- or mid- campaign performance data from direct buying, programmatic advertising, paid search and paid social—in just a few clicks. The presentations’ branding is customizable to align with the user’s company or client. This dramatically reduces the time needed to collect, organize and prepare data for “wrap-up” reports.
• Basis is now connected with Google Data Studio—a reporting tool for creating highly customizable, branded, live reports or dashboards with data visualizations. Campaign data from agencies and media teams easily port into it, which is shared with stakeholders online, streamlining communications related to campaign progress. Centro also provides custom templates.
• Basis’ redesigned home screen dashboard helps users optimize their work by highlighting client or campaign priorities and informing their decision-making. One interface draws attention to the user’s necessary actions by showing an overview of proposals, insertion orders, line item pacing, campaign KPIs, comments from partners and clients, and more.
• Forecasting analyzes a campaign’s set-up to instantly predict how many impressions are available and how much the user will be able to spend (based on KPIs) in programmatic ad channels. Users are empowered to build smarter media plans, distribute budgets accurately, and make campaign adjustments quickly.

“Connecting Basis to Google Data Studio is a game-changer for media teams and agencies that want to showcase their value. Rather than spending time transferring data from one system to another, our team is focused on communicating insights and results to our clients,” said Sarah Bergen, ad operations specialist, VI Marketing and Branding. “VI Marketing was an early adopter of Basis because it empowers us to build strong digital media capabilities differentiated by automation, comprehensiveness, agility and intelligence.”

“Centro’s product development balances the need for agencies to have powerful and scaled ad buying and activation with automated execution and workflow of all the other important elements of their business,” said Tyler Kelly, president, Centro. “Our latest additions to Basis focus on visualization, to make it faster and easier for media professionals to comprehend what is happening in their business— and synthesize their knowledge into insights for their clients or advertising stakeholders.”

Value to customers

Without automation, tasks such as reporting, creating presentations, media planning and campaign adjustment are typically manual processes that are both time-consuming and prone to errors. Adding visualization to these tasks enhances the quality of work users put into campaigns. The latest Basis improvements add to its qualities in delivering data in a simple and easy-to-understand manner via dashboards, performance screens, business and campaign insights, private marketplace details, tactic editors and more.

About Centro

Centro (https://www.centro.net) is a provider of enterprise-class software for digital advertising organizations. Its technology platform, Basis, is the first of its kind SaaS advertising solution unifying programmatic and direct media buying, along with workflow automation, cross-channel campaign planning, universal reporting and business intelligence. It boosts media, team and business performance by enabling advertisers to plan, buy and analyze real-time bidding (RTB), direct, search and social campaigns in a single platform. Headquartered in Chicago with 44 offices covering North America, South America and Europe, Centro has received numerous accolades for its commitment to employees and workplace culture.

# # #

Enacted in 2008, the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) continues to be the most consumer-friendly biometric privacy law in the country. In the wake of the Illinois Supreme Court’s seminal 2019 decision in Rosenbach v. Six Flags, plaintiffs have filed hundreds of class action lawsuits against businesses and employers in a broad range of industries, including manufacturing, logistics, retail, hospitality, food and beverage, health and technology. These lawsuits have been filed because of a perception that BIPA, as interpreted by the Illinois Supreme Court in Rosenbach, creates significant liability where biometric information has been collected from an employee or consumer without first providing notification and obtaining consent, even if no actual damages have been suffered.

In the spring of 2020, however, there have been a handful of court decisions that have bucked the previously plaintiff-friendly BIPA trends and perceptions. In the biometric privacy wars between consumer, company and insurance carrier, these recent cases have ruled in favor of the company, in areas such as federal subject matter and personal jurisdiction, interpretation of BIPA obligations and exceptions and BIPA-related insurance coverage disputes.

BIPA and Article III Standing

For the last few years, there has been a controversy amongst federal courts as to the circumstances for how a BIPA lawsuit can meet Article III subject matter jurisdiction standards when the plaintiff has not alleged that he or she suffered any actual damages. Some federal district courts previously held that the mere collection of biometric information by an entity, without any accompanying actual damages, does not satisfy Article III’s injury-in-fact standing requirements. These rulings led to plaintiffs and, less frequently, defendants using the “ace card” of a motion to remand a case to state court as a way to undermine proceeding in federal court or slow down the litigation.

On May 5, 2020, the Seventh Circuit, in Bryant v. Compass Group USA, Inc., put an end to these legal maneuverings and held that the mere collection of biometric information is itself enough of an injury in fact to confer Article III standing. The court stated that a violation of BIPA’s requirement that notice is given to an individual before his or her biometric information is collected (codified in Section 15(b)) is not a purely procedural requirement. Rather, failure to provide the required notice deprives an individual of informed consent and the ability to decline participation in the activity for which collection is required. However, the court held that a violation of BIPA’s requirements as to proper policies and retention standards (codified in Section 15(a)) does not create an injury in fact, but rather is akin to “an invasion of [ person’s] private domain, much like an act of trespass would be.” Thus, any claim based upon Section 15(a) cannot remain in federal court unless the violation in question caused actual harm.

The takeaway from Compass is that BIPA plaintiffs can sue in federal court and defendants can remove a Section 15(b) BIPA case filed in state court to federal court ⁠— if diversity requirements are met ⁠— without fear of the case being remanded for lack of standing.

Personal Jurisdiction and BIPA

Many companies have wondered about how far the requirements of BIPA extend jurisdictionally, and whether its strict provisions can apply to businesses having merely tangential contacts with Illinois. A recent case from the Northern District of Illinois has shed some light on this question.

In Bray v. Lathem Time Co., Case No. 3-19-CV-03157, an employee filed a class action lawsuit in an Illinois federal district court against Lathem Time Co. (Lathem), a Georgia-based company that designed and sold biometric-based timekeeping systems to his former employer, a lumber sales company, to track the time worked by hourly employees. The employee alleged that, even though he did not work for Lathem, the company violated BIPA by collecting, storing, using and/or disclosing his biometric information without giving notice and obtaining consent from him or establishing a biometric information retention policy as required by BIPA. Lathem moved to dismiss based upon lack of personal jurisdiction.

On March 27, 2020, the court granted Lathem’s motion. It held that Lathem did not have sufficient contacts with Illinois to establish personal jurisdiction. In particular, Lathem’s operation of a highly interactive website that could be used in Illinois was insufficient, absent any physical presence ⁠— offices or facilities ⁠— in Illinois or intentional targeting of Illinois customers (i.e., maintaining a sales or marketing program in Illinois, having advertising in Illinois, or sending representatives to Illinois). Moreover, the division of the plaintiff’s former employer with whom Lathem conducted business was actually in Arkansas, not Illinois. As such, the court held that the random, fortuitous or attenuated contacts that Lathem had with Illinois was insufficient for personal jurisdiction.

Lathem provides a reminder that irrespective of the strict nature of BIPA, courts will still require sufficient contacts to Illinois and a company can take proactive steps to avoid establishing these connections by being mindful of its physical presence in Illinois and whether it specifically markets to Illinois customers.

The Duty to Give Notice and the Definition of “Possession”

Many unresolved questions remain on the merit of BIPA claims, including the question of who exactly has the duty to seek consent from consumers ⁠— the initial collector or also other parties that come into possession of biometric information. In Corey Heard v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., Case No. 19 C 4158, a federal court in the Northern District of Illinois shined some light on when the obligations under BIPA to obtain consent are triggered, and what it means to actually “possess” biometric information for purposes of statutory liability.

In Heard, the plaintiff, a respiratory therapist in Illinois, filed a class action lawsuit against Becton, Dickinson and Company (Becton), which manufactured an automated medication dispensing system that was used by the plaintiff. Becton filed a motion to dismiss, contending that, as the manufacturer of devices used by other companies, Becton did not actively collect biometric information and thus it did not have the duty to provide notice and obtain informed consent from consumers, despite the fact that it retained the collected biometric information.

On Feb. 24, 2020, the court granted Becton’s motion, and, carefully construing the language of BIPA, held that the consent requirement (codified in Section 15(b)) only applied to entities that directly collected information, as opposed to a company whose device was merely used for the collection. The court also held that the plaintiff did not sufficiently allege that Becton had “possession” of biometric information ⁠— so as to invoke other BIPA provisions. The court noted that there were no allegations in the complaint that Becton “exercised any form or control over the data or that it held that data at its disposal.”

Heard is an important case that could have broad-reaching implications. First, it may allow a path to victory for timekeeping or other manufacturing or technology companies whose devices are merely used by another party, and who do not actively target consumers for collection. Heard may also provide a defense to cloud-service companies who have been sued under BIPA, and who merely host biometric data collected by other parties, but do not have actual access to the data in a readable form. Heard also provides a reminder that federal pleading standards are not automatically met by “merely parroting” the statutory language of BIPA in a complaint. Finally, at least one other federal court in the Northern District of Illinois – Figueroa v. Kronos Inc., No 19 C 1306 – has disagreed with the rationale in Heard and has allowed BIPA cases against outside vendors to proceed.

BIPA’s Healthcare Exemption

BIPA contains a statutory provision exempting from its requirements for information captured from a patient in a health care setting, or information collected for health care treatment.

In Vo v. VSP Retail Development Holding, Inc., the plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against VSP Retail Development Holding, Inc. (VSP), a manufacturer and seller of prescription and non-prescription eyewear. VSP’s website offered a virtual software that allowed consumers, like the plaintiff, to use their smartphones and other web-camera enabled devices to “try on” eyewear remotely after using the phones’ cameras to scan the consumer’s facial geometry. The plaintiff alleged that VSP scanned her face and used the information regarding her facial geometry without giving notice and obtaining her consent or establishing a biometric information retention policy as required by BIPA. VSP filed a motion to dismiss the complaint based upon the healthcare exemption.

On March 25, 2020, the court granted VSP’s motion to dismiss, holding that VSP’s alleged face scan was obtained from a patient in a health care setting. The court examined HIPAA’s definition of “health care,” which is: (1) “[p]reventive, diagnostic, therapeutic, rehabilitative, maintenance, or palliative care, and counseling, service, assessment, or procedure with respect to the physical or mental condition, or functional status, of an individual or that affects the structure or function of the body” and (2)”[s]ale or dispensing of a drug, device, equipment, other item in accordance with a prescription.” The court noted the complaint alleged VSP manufactured and sold prescription and non-prescription eyewear, which federal regulations classify as Class I medical devices. The court further found that VSP’s collection of facial geometry was similar to the diagnostic service typically performed by an eye care professional in order to ensure the proper fit for the corrective eyewear and that the collection is therefore from a patient in a health care setting.

Under BIPA, the health care exemption can be a powerful weapon for certain defendants, as Vo helps highlight. It can be creatively applied to industries traditionally not considered “healthcare.”

Insurance Coverage for BIPA Claims

In BIPA litigation, a key question is whether the defendant to a BIPA claim is entitled to any insurance coverage under a pre-existing policy. This question is dependent upon the specific coverage language used in the policy.

In West Bend Mutual Insurance Company v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., the defendant to a BIPA lawsuit, Krishna Schaumburg Tan (Krishna), sought coverage from its insurance carrier West Bend. The carrier agreed to defend Krishna under a reservation of rights, and then filed suit seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify Krishna. The trial court held that West Bend had a duty to defend under the insurance agreement.

On March 20, 2020, the Illinois Appellate Court for the First District affirmed the trial court’s decision. The key question focused on how to interpret the insurance policy’s definition of “personal injury,” and whether the underlying BIPA lawsuit fell under this term. The policy defined “personal injury,” in part, as injuries arising out of “oral or written publication of material that violates a person’s right of privacy.” The court held the underlying lawsuit’s allegations that Krishna disseminated biometric information to third parties satisfied the “publication” aspect of the policy’s definitions. The court also narrowly interpreted a data-privacy related coverage exclusion, stating that it only applied to violations of statutes governing “methods of communication” such as emails, faxes and phone calls, and “not to other statutes that limit the sending or sharing of certain information.”

The West Bend case has important implications for insurance coverage of BIPA claims. It also has a potentially significant effect on the proper statute of limitations under BIPA, which is silent on the limitations period. Defendants have argued that the one-year catch-all statute of limitations for slander, libel or for publication of matter violating the right of privacy found in the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure applies, and, interestingly, this catch-all has nearly identical language to the policy definition in West Bend. It remains to be seen whether the effects of the West Bend ruling will extend beyond the insurance context.

These cases show that the language of BIPA, as interpreted by the courts, is nuanced and there are some important defenses for defendants to consider. One thing is certain ⁠— due to the hundreds of BIPA cases that have been filed in state and federal courts in the last year, it is expected that there will be many more decisions on important procedural and merits issues in the next six months.

Taft attorneys remain committed to monitoring this ever-changing area of the law and providing counseling and litigation services for companies who are dealing with issues related to the collection of biometric information.

This post originally appeared on the Taft blog, here.

The Taft Law Team

Enacted in 2008, the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) continues to be the most consumer-friendly biometric privacy law in the country. In the wake of the Illinois Supreme Court’s seminal 2019 decision in Rosenbach v. Six Flags, plaintiffs have filed hundreds of class action lawsuits against businesses and employers in a broad range of industries, including manufacturing, logistics, retail, hospitality, food and beverage, health and technology. These lawsuits have been filed because of a perception that BIPA, as interpreted by the Illinois Supreme Court in Rosenbach, creates significant liability where biometric information has been collected from an employee or consumer without first providing notification and obtaining consent, even if no actual damages have been suffered.

In the spring of 2020, however, there have been a handful of court decisions that have bucked the previously plaintiff-friendly BIPA trends and perceptions. In the biometric privacy wars between consumer, company and insurance carrier, these recent cases have ruled in favor of the company, in areas such as federal subject matter and personal jurisdiction, interpretation of BIPA obligations and exceptions and BIPA-related insurance coverage disputes.

BIPA and Article III Standing

For the last few years, there has been a controversy amongst federal courts as to the circumstances for how a BIPA lawsuit can meet Article III subject matter jurisdiction standards when the plaintiff has not alleged that he or she suffered any actual damages. Some federal district courts previously held that the mere collection of biometric information by an entity, without any accompanying actual damages, does not satisfy Article III’s injury-in-fact standing requirements. These rulings led to plaintiffs and, less frequently, defendants using the “ace card” of a motion to remand a case to state court as a way to undermine proceeding in federal court or slow down the litigation.

On May 5, 2020, the Seventh Circuit, in Bryant v. Compass Group USA, Inc., put an end to these legal maneuverings and held that the mere collection of biometric information is itself enough of an injury in fact to confer Article III standing. The court stated that a violation of BIPA’s requirement that notice is given to an individual before his or her biometric information is collected (codified in Section 15(b)) is not a purely procedural requirement. Rather, failure to provide the required notice deprives an individual of informed consent and the ability to decline participation in the activity for which collection is required. However, the court held that a violation of BIPA’s requirements as to proper policies and retention standards (codified in Section 15(a)) does not create an injury in fact, but rather is akin to “an invasion of [ person’s] private domain, much like an act of trespass would be.” Thus, any claim based upon Section 15(a) cannot remain in federal court unless the violation in question caused actual harm.

The takeaway from Compass is that BIPA plaintiffs can sue in federal court and defendants can remove a Section 15(b) BIPA case filed in state court to federal court ⁠— if diversity requirements are met ⁠— without fear of the case being remanded for lack of standing.

Personal Jurisdiction and BIPA

Many companies have wondered about how far the requirements of BIPA extend jurisdictionally, and whether its strict provisions can apply to businesses having merely tangential contacts with Illinois. A recent case from the Northern District of Illinois has shed some light on this question.

In Bray v. Lathem Time Co., Case No. 3-19-CV-03157, an employee filed a class action lawsuit in an Illinois federal district court against Lathem Time Co. (Lathem), a Georgia-based company that designed and sold biometric-based timekeeping systems to his former employer, a lumber sales company, to track the time worked by hourly employees. The employee alleged that, even though he did not work for Lathem, the company violated BIPA by collecting, storing, using and/or disclosing his biometric information without giving notice and obtaining consent from him or establishing a biometric information retention policy as required by BIPA. Lathem moved to dismiss based upon lack of personal jurisdiction.

On March 27, 2020, the court granted Lathem’s motion. It held that Lathem did not have sufficient contacts with Illinois to establish personal jurisdiction. In particular, Lathem’s operation of a highly interactive website that could be used in Illinois was insufficient, absent any physical presence ⁠— offices or facilities ⁠— in Illinois or intentional targeting of Illinois customers (i.e., maintaining a sales or marketing program in Illinois, having advertising in Illinois, or sending representatives to Illinois). Moreover, the division of the plaintiff’s former employer with whom Lathem conducted business was actually in Arkansas, not Illinois. As such, the court held that the random, fortuitous or attenuated contacts that Lathem had with Illinois was insufficient for personal jurisdiction.

Lathem provides a reminder that irrespective of the strict nature of BIPA, courts will still require sufficient contacts to Illinois and a company can take proactive steps to avoid establishing these connections by being mindful of its physical presence in Illinois and whether it specifically markets to Illinois customers.

The Duty to Give Notice and the Definition of “Possession”

Many unresolved questions remain on the merit of BIPA claims, including the question of who exactly has the duty to seek consent from consumers ⁠— the initial collector or also other parties that come into possession of biometric information. In Corey Heard v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., Case No. 19 C 4158, a federal court in the Northern District of Illinois shined some light on when the obligations under BIPA to obtain consent are triggered, and what it means to actually “possess” biometric information for purposes of statutory liability.

In Heard, the plaintiff, a respiratory therapist in Illinois, filed a class action lawsuit against Becton, Dickinson and Company (Becton), which manufactured an automated medication dispensing system that was used by the plaintiff. Becton filed a motion to dismiss, contending that, as the manufacturer of devices used by other companies, Becton did not actively collect biometric information and thus it did not have the duty to provide notice and obtain informed consent from consumers, despite the fact that it retained the collected biometric information.

On Feb. 24, 2020, the court granted Becton’s motion, and, carefully construing the language of BIPA, held that the consent requirement (codified in Section 15(b)) only applied to entities that directly collected information, as opposed to a company whose device was merely used for the collection. The court also held that the plaintiff did not sufficiently allege that Becton had “possession” of biometric information ⁠— so as to invoke other BIPA provisions. The court noted that there were no allegations in the complaint that Becton “exercised any form or control over the data or that it held that data at its disposal.”

Heard is an important case that could have broad-reaching implications. First, it may allow a path to victory for timekeeping or other manufacturing or technology companies whose devices are merely used by another party, and who do not actively target consumers for collection. Heard may also provide a defense to cloud-service companies who have been sued under BIPA, and who merely host biometric data collected by other parties, but do not have actual access to the data in a readable form. Heard also provides a reminder that federal pleading standards are not automatically met by “merely parroting” the statutory language of BIPA in a complaint. Finally, at least one other federal court in the Northern District of Illinois – Figueroa v. Kronos Inc., No 19 C 1306 – has disagreed with the rationale in Heard and has allowed BIPA cases against outside vendors to proceed.

BIPA’s Healthcare Exemption

BIPA contains a statutory provision exempting from its requirements for information captured from a patient in a health care setting, or information collected for health care treatment.

In Vo v. VSP Retail Development Holding, Inc., the plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against VSP Retail Development Holding, Inc. (VSP), a manufacturer and seller of prescription and non-prescription eyewear. VSP’s website offered a virtual software that allowed consumers, like the plaintiff, to use their smartphones and other web-camera enabled devices to “try on” eyewear remotely after using the phones’ cameras to scan the consumer’s facial geometry. The plaintiff alleged that VSP scanned her face and used the information regarding her facial geometry without giving notice and obtaining her consent or establishing a biometric information retention policy as required by BIPA. VSP filed a motion to dismiss the complaint based upon the healthcare exemption.

On March 25, 2020, the court granted VSP’s motion to dismiss, holding that VSP’s alleged face scan was obtained from a patient in a health care setting. The court examined HIPAA’s definition of “health care,” which is: (1) “[p]reventive, diagnostic, therapeutic, rehabilitative, maintenance, or palliative care, and counseling, service, assessment, or procedure with respect to the physical or mental condition, or functional status, of an individual or that affects the structure or function of the body” and (2)”[s]ale or dispensing of a drug, device, equipment, other item in accordance with a prescription.” The court noted the complaint alleged VSP manufactured and sold prescription and non-prescription eyewear, which federal regulations classify as Class I medical devices. The court further found that VSP’s collection of facial geometry was similar to the diagnostic service typically performed by an eye care professional in order to ensure the proper fit for the corrective eyewear and that the collection is therefore from a patient in a health care setting.

Under BIPA, the health care exemption can be a powerful weapon for certain defendants, as Vo helps highlight. It can be creatively applied to industries traditionally not considered “healthcare.”

Insurance Coverage for BIPA Claims

In BIPA litigation, a key question is whether the defendant to a BIPA claim is entitled to any insurance coverage under a pre-existing policy. This question is dependent upon the specific coverage language used in the policy.

In West Bend Mutual Insurance Company v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., the defendant to a BIPA lawsuit, Krishna Schaumburg Tan (Krishna), sought coverage from its insurance carrier West Bend. The carrier agreed to defend Krishna under a reservation of rights, and then filed suit seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify Krishna. The trial court held that West Bend had a duty to defend under the insurance agreement.

On March 20, 2020, the Illinois Appellate Court for the First District affirmed the trial court’s decision. The key question focused on how to interpret the insurance policy’s definition of “personal injury,” and whether the underlying BIPA lawsuit fell under this term. The policy defined “personal injury,” in part, as injuries arising out of “oral or written publication of material that violates a person’s right of privacy.” The court held the underlying lawsuit’s allegations that Krishna disseminated biometric information to third parties satisfied the “publication” aspect of the policy’s definitions. The court also narrowly interpreted a data-privacy related coverage exclusion, stating that it only applied to violations of statutes governing “methods of communication” such as emails, faxes and phone calls, and “not to other statutes that limit the sending or sharing of certain information.”

The West Bend case has important implications for insurance coverage of BIPA claims. It also has a potentially significant effect on the proper statute of limitations under BIPA, which is silent on the limitations period. Defendants have argued that the one-year catch-all statute of limitations for slander, libel or for publication of matter violating the right of privacy found in the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure applies, and, interestingly, this catch-all has nearly identical language to the policy definition in West Bend. It remains to be seen whether the effects of the West Bend ruling will extend beyond the insurance context.

These cases show that the language of BIPA, as interpreted by the courts, is nuanced and there are some important defenses for defendants to consider. One thing is certain ⁠— due to the hundreds of BIPA cases that have been filed in state and federal courts in the last year, it is expected that there will be many more decisions on important procedural and merits issues in the next six months.

Taft attorneys remain committed to monitoring this ever-changing area of the law and providing counseling and litigation services for companies who are dealing with issues related to the collection of biometric information.

This post originally appeared on the Taft blog, here.

By now, it’s become widely accepted that we’re invariably, and irrevocably, changed. And while some folks like to bemoan their dry hands or cabin fever – we think that it goes deeper than that. Humans are some of the most adaptable, resilient creatures on the planet and nothing shows it better than how we decide to create our new normal. 

Prior to the restrictions, when you walked through the doors at NuCurrent (a wireless power company) it was buzzing with activity: a team of engineers would be in the large conference room meeting with clients; sales was sauntering over to marketing to collaborate on a new pitch; CEO Jacob Babcock would throw you a casual “hey, goodmorning”; while smells of coffee & solder wafted from the lab. 

It was exciting to come to work each day. But within weeks after CES in early January – and cancellations at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona – we knew the rumblings of what made its way to Seattle in March would soon come for Chicago. 

And then we were met with the question: How will NuCurrent continue to provide inductive charging solutions when our team of multidisciplinary engineers will no longer be steps away from each other? In the world of product development, a few weeks “off” can quickly spiral into months-long delays, so it was obvious that closing our doors couldn’t be an option.

Here’s how we successfully managed to split our headquartered office into 35. 

It’s wise to decentralize

Wireless power solutions are created by combining the expertise of antenna, electronics, mechanical, radio frequency and software engineering disciplines. Meaning that a team of five people will touch a prototype before it’s out the door and to the client. This happens every time, for every project. Our heads of engineering and operations had to accurately forecast the next two months of engineering activity based on the project pipeline to determine which teams needed what and when. Each engineer’s survival kit included their testing equipment, hardware prototypes and shipping materials for client deliverables. 

Budget for what you can (and can’t) afford 

Even though each engineer went home with a personalized survival kit based on their roles & projects – some equipment can’t be bought 20 times over. Network, Impedance and Spectrum Analyzers, for example, cost roughly $100K, $20K & $2K and are critical to the work that we do. To remedy this, we created a system to allow individual members of our team to reserve the lab should they need to conduct some testing independently. And, of course, protective equipment was provided and sanitizing wipes were right there to ensure the next person would be safe to run their tests.

Have a contingency plan for your contingency plan

Our new normal rests in the unknown – and we have no choice but to embrace that. For many of us, those are questions like: What if we’re working from home for another year? What if restrictions lift by the end of summer? Which employees would we phase in first, and why? Should we postpone our move to a larger office space? Our leaders are increasing the frequency of their planning cycles to address the day-to-day performance metrics alongside the macro forces (i.e. government health recommendations & economic health) that are now entwined with our business.  

We couldn’t have predicted any of this. Not COVID, and surely not the success of how well our once, in-office wireless power team would adapt to being spread across 35 separate locations around the world. But our people are empowered & are owning the task of shifting our organizational mentality from surviving back to thriving. 

If a stellar job performance goes unrecognized, how often do you think it will be repeated? People need both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to continuously work at their best. When building and showcasing your company culture, employee recognition should be a crucial component. Sure, you may have great products, services, and customers, but that doesn’t mean much without the individuals who work hard every day to make the company successful.

Every company searches for top performers. It’s important to motivate dedicated individuals to join your team by showing them that appreciation for hard work is a foundation of your culture. “At CSC Corptax a job well done is recognized. Your boss reaches out to you. HR rewards us with a pizza party and catered lunches. We get handwritten cards thanking us for our hard work,” says Kathryn, project manager. It doesn’t take a lot to share appreciation, and it goes a long way to help you acquire top talent and encourage current employees to stay and grow with your organization. We have found that employees who hear positive feedback are more motivated to perform at their best every day, an outcome that is supported by research conducted by IBM Smarter Workforce Institute.

General recognition is fine, but its impact only goes so far. Be specific about what your teams and colleagues do well to show that you understand their value. Don’t limit yourself to recognizing only certain segments of the organization—ensure your process stretches across teams and levels and includes peer-to-peer recognition. “Everyone wants to feel validated, and it’s not hard to do. We take time out weekly, monthly, and at the end of the year to recognize top sales efforts. That doesn’t mean just closing the sale—it can be acquiring a prospect, which is a big deal. There are so many integral people involved in our process—we recognize sales engineers who help on the demo, lead-generation folks, the Support and Professional Services teams that help clients implement products and improve business processes. It’s a group effort all the way. You know that hard work pays off at CSC Corptax—be it for a job well done or from a compensation standpoint—it all works,” says Dean, director, Sales at CSC Corptax. Recognizing peers helps build strong relationships and leads to higher levels of collaboration. Don’t limit recognition to big projects and milestones—acknowledging small wins also drives motivation and increases job satisfaction.

At CSC Corptax, one of our values is being genuine. For us, that means being direct, open, and honest in all we do, exhibiting the highest level of integrity, and building trust. Recognizing others is tied directly to the foundation of who we are as an organization. We encourage workplace recognition through formal peer-to-peer recognition programs, celebrations and outings, and a culture of appreciation that starts at the top. “The CEO, directors, and my managers have all recognized me for the work I’ve done and sent personal emails to me which made me feel on top of the world. I receive recognition from other department managers as well, which is fantastic,” says Bharti, senior analyst, Quality Assurance at CSC Corptax.

If you’re ready to take the next step to build a company culture that sets you apart, take some time to invest in recognition, whether it’s formal programs or simply building a culture of kindness. Get buy-in across the organization and be genuine in your approach. If you’re looking for an employer that values recognition, check us out: corptax.com/about/careers/.

Medtelligent, Inc, provider of ALIS software for assisted living, memory care, and independent living communities, today announced that its ALIS Connect product will be offered free through September as assisted living communities increasingly look for ways to efficiently engage families while “no visitor” policies remain in place to slow the spread of coronavirus. 

ALIS Connect includes social sharing, health profile information, and bill payment features that help communities provide excellent customer service while maintaining a focus on resident care. 

“We’ve seen an uptick in demand for ALIS Connect among our existing customers as communities work to keep families up-to-date about what’s going on ‘in the building’,” said John Shafaee, chief executive officer of Medtelligent. “At the same time, staff is burdened by new routines and processes. Communities are looking for efficiencies now more than ever. ALIS Connect can provide that in the form of streamlined communication and realtime access to a resident’s health profile information. If that saves a few minutes or hours of a nurse or community engagement manager’s time, we think that’s a meaningful contribution.” 

ALIS Connect allows invited family members and authorized community team members to:

• Share updates through a private social feed;
• Access health information including assessment and medication information and; 
• View and pay bills through a secure, PCI-compliant web interface.

“We are seeing firsthand how creatively our customers are responding to the changes brought about by the COVID-19 crisis. We’re offering the product free through the summer because we want to make sure price is not a barrier to any community that is trying to keep families as connected to their loved one as possible .” 

Devbridge builds custom enterprise applications that deliver measurable results for Global 2000 organizations and their customers across all industries. Our cross-functional teams use deep expertise across product, design, and engineering to solve some of the most complex business challenges with elegant software. We take ownership of results and ship mission-critical, user-centric software 4x faster than the industry average.

Chicagoan by birth or relocation?

Born and raised in Joliet, Illinois. Always wanted to move to Chicago, moved here shortly after college. Love that Chicago is a city of neighborhoods.

What’s the best advice that you’ve ever received?

It’s an important and popular fact that things are not always what they seem.

How did you come to work with Devbridge?

I was fortunate enough to work with Laura Graves (Managing Director, Devbridge) for nearly five years in a past life. A little while after settling in at Devbridge, she told me how much she loved working here and that she thought I would fit in pretty well too. I had the opportunity to meet a handful of Devbridgers and was impressed by everyone I talked to. I was happy to be given the opportunity to join the team and contribute to Devbridge’s impact in Chicago Tech.

Dead or alive, if you could have a dinner party with three famous and influential figures, who would they be and why?

Julia Child, Paula Scher, and Venerable Bede. Julia because of her humanity, humility, and an contagious passion for life. Paula for her shrewdness and sense of humor despite adversity, and Venerable Bede because would it be wild having a conversation with someone methodical and observational who was alive fourteen centuries ago.

What do you think are the top issues facing the Illinois tech community?

Diversity and inclusion in hiring, and reaching out to underserved communities that are not afforded much exposure to the tech scene throughout Chicago. The City of Chicago and the Illinois Technology and Research Corridor are poised to make a significant impact in the lives of many young children and budding technologists. I am pleased to see the outreach that ITA and other organizations are making and am looking forward to seeing these initiatives grow in the future.

CHICAGO, IL – PhysIQ, the Department of Defense, and The Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc. (HJF), in conjunction with the Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Defense (JPEO-CBRND), announced the launch of an initiative to deploy physIQ’s platform to collect and analyze wearable sensor data to better understand the pathophysiology of COVID-19. Continuous monitoring with sophisticated personalized algorithms will be used to evaluate physiologic signals to predict disease progression and early indication of infection, and potentially evaluate novel treatments for COVID-19. This objective corresponds with JPEO-CBRND’s mission to evaluate advanced technologies for disease outbreak preparedness, as well as to understand how patients’ physiological data can be monitored remotely using continuously streaming wearable sensor data and Artificial Intelligence (AI). 

PhysIQ, a company that specializes in collecting and analyzing continuous physiological data collected from wearable biosensors through its pinpointIQTM platform, will deploy kits to individuals associated with military hospitals in the U.S., as well as across sites in Southeast Asia.  Confirmed COVID-19 positive individuals and patients at high risk of exposure will wear a clinical-grade biosensor that continuously streams data to physIQ’s platform where advanced FDA cleared AI-based analytics will process the raw vital sign data.

“We are fortunate to have previously worked with physIQ in our fight against Ebola and Sepsis in Africa and are striving to rapidly translate those novel tools and strategies for the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Dr. Danielle Clark, HJF’s Director of the Austere Environments Consortium for Enhanced Sepsis Outcomes (ACESO) program. “Our goal is to develop a suite of technologies, including physiologic monitoring to identify patients at risk of progression to severe disease, detect infection prior to symptom onset, and ultimately guide clinical decisions. We plan to track thousands of patients and high-risk contacts, as well as front-line healthcare workers. It is critical that we have tools to differentiate those who should self-isolate at home from those who require hospitalization.”

Among the specific objectives of the study are to use continuous physiological data to characterize immune response to infection, evaluate novel diagnostic and prognostic tools, and investigate efficacy of emergency investigational new drug therapies that may be administered to enrolled participants.

“As we find ourselves in these challenging times it is imperative to collaborate with the private sector in order to leverage every tool possible in this fight to understand COVID-19,” said Dr. Matt Hepburn, Joint Project Lead CBRN Defense Enabling Biotechnologies.  “Teaming up with physIQ will give us clinical insights into this virus on a scale that has not been done before, while allowing us to monitor the progress of those with the disease in an outpatient setting 24×7.”  

“Every day it is becoming more obvious that we need to deliver COVID-19 care in the home, as hospital capacity cannot keep up with the fallout of this devastating virus,” said Gary Conkright, CEO of physIQ.  “Achieving this will require clinical and physiological insight traditionally not available in an outpatient environment or with periodic spot checks of vitals that appear to be lagging indicators with this virus.  With wearable biosensors and advanced analytics, we can provide continuous, high-fidelity, multidimensional physiological insight required to understand and better treat this disease.  We are honored to expand upon our breakthrough Ebola work with Dr. Clark to now address the most significant global crisis in our lifetime.”

PhysIQ and HJF clinical teams are currently implementing the global deployment plan and patient enrollment has already begun.  PhysIQ technology is currently being utilized in observational studies on multiple protocols. The goal is to expand its use across additional protocols and clinical studies.  Given the nature of the continuous data collection within the pinpointIQTM platform, study clinicians will have rapid access to the streaming data and analytics to monitor those individuals that have confirmed cases and those that have been exposed. 

###