Search for: "Pineda v. Williams-Sonoma"
Results 1 - 20
of 80
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Sep 2017, 7:48 am
Williams-Sonoma [read post]
30 Jul 2016, 8:49 am
(Compare with Pineda v. [read post]
6 May 2016, 10:42 am
Citing Rodman v. [read post]
24 Mar 2016, 12:00 am
Pineda v. [read post]
11 Jan 2016, 7:00 am
Williams-Sonoma [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 1:51 pm
Nordstrom California Supreme Court: Retail Privacy Statute Doesn’t Apply to Download Transactions – Apple v Superior Court (Krescent) CA Court Confirms that Pineda v Williams-Sonoma (the Zip-Code-as-PII Case) Applies Retrospectively — Dardarian v. [read post]
27 Oct 2014, 4:01 pm
Williams-Sonoma Category: Product #: Regular price:$ (Sale ends !) [read post]
29 May 2014, 3:53 pm
., Pineda), where courts say that even a zip code along with demographic information is enough to identify someone. [read post]
22 Mar 2014, 11:11 am
Williams-Sonoma“.) [read post]
6 Dec 2013, 8:36 am
Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc. decision in 2011. [read post]
29 Nov 2013, 12:08 pm
Williams-Sonoma. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 7:46 pm
Pineda v. [read post]
21 Mar 2013, 9:41 am
Williams-Sonoma, decided in late 2011.) [read post]
18 Mar 2013, 5:18 pm
In 2011, the California Supreme Court held in Pineda v. [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 2:38 pm
Pineda v. [read post]
7 Feb 2013, 10:46 am
Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc., which held that for purposes of the Song-Beverly Act, ZIP codes constitute “personal identification information” (PII). [read post]
6 Feb 2013, 1:25 pm
In Pineda v. [read post]
CA Supreme Court Holds That Song-Beverly Does Not Apply To Online Purchases For Electronic Downloads
5 Feb 2013, 1:11 pm
In Pineda v. [read post]
4 Aug 2012, 9:30 am
Williams-Sonoma. [read post]
