Lopez vs. Apple, Inc.

Case Background

On August 7, 2019, Plaintiff Fumiko Lopez and others filed a Class action lawsuit in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division (Case number: 4:19cv4577). This case was assigned to Judge Jeffrey S. White and referred to Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim.

Cause

Apple Inc. faced allegations of unlawfully intercepting and recording private conversations through its Siri-enabled devices without the explicit consent of users. Plaintiffs, including Fumiko Lopez, her minor child, and other similarly affected individuals, claimed that Apple’s products, such as iPhones, Apple Watches, and HomePods, captured sensitive communications—even when users did not activate Siri by saying the trigger phrase "Hey Siri" or manually enabling it. These recordings reportedly occurred accidentally and included confidential discussions, such as medical consultations, private business dealings, and intimate personal moments. Despite Apple’s public assurances about user privacy, the company allegedly transmitted these recordings to its servers. It also allowed third-party contractors to analyze the data. The plaintiffs argued that Apple used this information to improve Siri’s functionality. They claimed that Apple aimed to gain a competitive edge in the tech market. This occurred all while violating user trust and privacy. These alleged actions took place over an extended period. The period spanned from October 2011 to the present. Millions of devices sold across the United States were affected.

Injuries

The plaintiffs reported significant emotional and psychological injuries resulting from Apple’s unauthorized surveillance practices. They claimed that the interception of their private conversations caused distress and embarrassment. It also created a sense of betrayal regarding their trust in Apple’s privacy commitments. The plaintiffs emphasized that this breach of privacy was particularly egregious in cases involving children. Children could not legally consent to such recordings. Apple reportedly failed to protect the sensitive communications of its