Rebecca Hartman, Joseph Turner, R.H., a Minor, by and through her Guardian and Next of Friend Rebecca Hartman, and E.T., a Minor, by and through his Guardian and Next of Friend Joseph Turner, on behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated known and unknown v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

Hartman v. Meta Platforms, Inc. · United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois · May 13, 2026 · No. 3:23-CV-02995-NJR

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois stayed a putative class action against Meta Platforms, Inc. pending resolution of Meta’s motion to certify an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). The court concluded that Meta demonstrated some likelihood of success concerning the enforceability of a California choice-of-law provision in litigation involving the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act, and that the balance of harms and public interest supported a stay.

Holdings

  1. The court granted Meta's motion to stay the action pending resolution of Meta's motion for interlocutory appellate review and, if the appeal is permitted, pending the Seventh Circuit's decision on the merits of the choice-of-law order.
  2. Meta had some likelihood of success because Stromberg Metal Works remained a Seventh Circuit precedent that could support strict enforcement of the California choice-of-law provision, even though the district court believed its own choice-of-law analysis was correct.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the court should stay the action pending resolution of Meta's motion to certify the choice-of-law order for interlocutory appellate review under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
  2. Whether the factors governing a stay pending appeal—likelihood of success, irreparable harm, and the public interest—weighed in favor of staying the case.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (6)

  • Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936)(followed)
  • In re A & F Enter., Inc. II, 742 F.3d 763, 766 (7th Cir. 2014)(followed)
  • Stromberg Metal Works, Inc. v. Press Mech., Inc., 77 F.3d 928, 933 (7th Cir. 1996)(considered)
  • Smurfit Newsprint Corp. v. Se. Paper Mfg., 368 F.3d 944, 949 (7th Cir. 2004)(followed)
  • BankDirect Cap. Fin., LLC v. Cap. Premium Fin., Inc., 326 F.R.D. 171, 174 (N.D. Ill. 2018)(followed)
  • Chapman v. First Index, Inc., 796 F.3d 783, 787 (7th Cir. 2015)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…