Foreign matches have actually been brought against United States companies in American courts. But its uncommon, and is usually confined to cases that do not have alternative legal online forums– one example pointed out by District Judge Phyllis Hamilton was Carijano v. Occidental Petroleum Corp, a case where Peruvian native groups took legal action against the United States petroleum producer for ecological contamination.
” The plaintiff was wishing for a choice that would have opened the door to a multitude of similar cases against US-based tech business, taken legal action against in the United States under UK law,” stated Takashima. “The court firmly closed the door on that.”
PubMatic testified that it would want to object to the suit in the UK, which Judge Hamilton kept in mind in her choice. She also said the UKs GDPR law is still being established in the country, and that it would be difficult for the district court to acquaint itself with the law, not to mention set precedent.
“California has little interest in hosting this conflict, and PubMatics desire to send to UK jurisdiction alleviates versus this foreign complainants choice of forum,” she wrote in her dismissal.

The United States Northern District Court of California dismissed a case previously this week brought by Hugo Elliott, a resident of the UK who resides in England, versus the American ad tech business PubMatic.
The case was dismissed out of hand, so it hardly appears a significant choice. Except that it would have been the very first time that a British or EU citizen brought a suit versus an American company in a United States court based on the GDPR.
” The plaintiff was looking for a method to bond UK substantive law on to United States procedural law for lawsuits purposes, and basically import UK GDPR litigation into the United States, simply on the grounds that PubMatic is based here,” stated Edward Takashima, one of PubMatics attorneys at the law office Boies Schiller Flexner.
Elliott, the plaintiff, sent that PubMatic tracked him across the web, together with other residents of England and Wales represented in the class-action suit, in infraction of the GDPR.
An interesting wrinkle: The EU GDPR requires that suits be brought in European courts. The UK has its own variation of the law, which is materially similar in terms of privacy requirements, other than it does not clearly state that fits go to domestic courts.
There has been a growing chorus of plaintiff lawyers excited to try a GDPR match in the US, according to Mark Mao, a partner at BSF who leads the information privacy practice. Class-action fits are not as common or developed in Europe, so attorneys accustomed to the US system have actually desired to test the class-action system here.