Third Circuit Hears Oral Arguments in FTC v. Wyndham
Time 2 Minute Read

On March 3, 2015, the Third Circuit heard oral arguments in FTC v. Wyndham Worldwide Corp. (“Wyndham”) on whether the FTC has the authority to regulate private companies’ data security under Section 5 of the FTC Act.

As we previously reported, on June 26, 2012, the FTC announced that it had filed suit against Wyndham and three of its subsidiaries alleging that the company posted misleading representations on Wyndham websites regarding how the company safeguarded customer information. In addition, the FTC alleged that Wyndham failed to maintain reasonable data security practices, leading to three separate data breaches involving hackers accessing sensitive consumer data. In response, Wyndham challenged the FTC’s authority to bring charges against private companies’ data security, arguing that by adopting targeted security legislation such as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Congress had precluded the FTC’s jurisdiction over data security. Wyndham also argued that before bringing a Section 5 enforcement action, the FTC must publish “rules, regulations, or other guidelines” setting out the acceptable security standards.

Though Wyndham’s arguments were rejected by the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, Law360 reported that the Third Circuit panel seemed receptive to Wyndham’s arguments, with Judge Thomas L. Ambro stating that the legislative history indicates that the FTC may only be authorized to bring “routine fraud cases” to the court, and the panel also spending a considerable amount of time considering Wyndham’s argument that the FTC’s failed to give sufficient notice of what constitutes “unreasonable” data security practices. According to Law360, the court also seemed unlikely to accept the FTC’s argument that deference should be given to the Eleventh Circuit’s January 2014 ruling in the FTC’s suit against LabMD, in which LabMD also challenged the FTC’s authority to bring an administrative challenge against private companies for data security practices. The Eleventh Circuit ruled that it did not have jurisdiction to evaluate the merits of the case until the FTC takes a reviewable final agency action.

The final outcome of FTC v. Wyndham has the potential to make a significant impact on the FTC’s regulation of consumer data security.

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 2 Minute Read

On April 1, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that the 2024 amendment to Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act, limiting damages, applies retroactively to pending cases.

Time 3 Minute Read

The Connecticut Attorney General recently issued a legal memorandum regarding the application of existing Connecticut laws, such as the Connecticut Data Privacy Act, to the use of artificial intelligence.

Time 3 Minute Read

On March 20, 2026, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt signed SB 546 into law, enacting the Oklahoma Consumer Data Privacy Act, which will take effect on January 1, 2027.

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.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Archives

Jump to Page