First Ever BIPA Trial Results in $228 Million Judgment Against BNSF Railway
Time 2 Minute Read

On October 12, 2022, a federal jury found BNSF Railway, operator of one of the largest freight railroad networks in North America, violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”) in the first ever BIPA case to go to trial. In Richard Rogers v. BNSF Railway Company (Case No. 19-C-3083, N.D. Ill.), truck drivers’ fingerprints were scanned for identity verification purposes when visiting BNSF rail yards to pick up and drop off loads. The jury found that BNSF recklessly or intentionally violated the law 45,600 times when it collected such fingerprint scans without written, informed permission or notice.

The outcome of Richard Rogers v. BNSF Railway Company highlights how damages may be calculated in BIPA suits going forward, as well as how companies may be liable for BIPA compliance even where they outsource biometric information collection and processing. Specifically:

  • Damages calculation: BIPA provides for up to $5,000 for every willful or reckless violation and $1,000 for every negligent violation. The jury found that BNSF recklessly or intentionally violated BIPA 45,600 times – the estimated number of drivers whose fingerprints were scanned – to total $228 million in damages against BNSF.
  • Use of vendors for biometric processing: BNSF was found liable for BIPA violations even though it was not the party that collected the fingerprints. BNSF had hired a third party, Remprex LLC, to process the drivers’ fingerprints at its rail yards. The jury found that BNSF was nonetheless responsible for compliance with the law.

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 3 Minute Read

The results are in: attorneys are filing more employment law cases in court.  Indeed, year-end reporting from legal databases like LexMachina confirm that the pace of filing new employment discrimination cases reached its highest level in 2025, surpassing 20,000 new filings nationwide.  Though overtime and minimum wage lawsuits under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) have continued to decline since 2015, discrimination cases under laws like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act are on the rise.

Time 1 Minute Read

A recent federal court decision determined that documents created by a criminal defendant using AI and subsequently shared with legal counsel were not shielded by attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine. In USA v. Heppner, Judge Jed S. Rakoff of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York compelled the disclosure of 31 documents created with Anthropic’s Claude. This order was issued despite the defendant including information from counsel in the AI tool’s input and later providing the resulting outputs to his attorneys. The ruling offers early judicial perspective on privilege concerns involving AI-generated materials, an area where case law remains sparse.

Time 1 Minute Read

A recent federal court ruling held that AI-generated documents prepared by a defendant and later shared with legal counsel were not protected by attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine.

Time 4 Minute Read

On January 27, 2026, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership hosted a fireside chat with California Privacy Protection Agency General Counsel Phil Laird in honor of Data Privacy Day.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Archives

Jump to Page