1

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Steven Sklaver (237612)

ssklaver@susmangodfrey.com

Kalpana Srinivasan (237460)

ksrinivasan@susmangodfrey.com

Michael Gervais (330731)

mgervais@susmangodfrey.com

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1400

Los Angeles, CA 90067

Phone: (310) 789-3100

Facsimile: (310) 789-3150

Counsel for Plaintiff and Proposed Class

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

C.H., a minor, by and through his 

Guardian, Marc Halpin, individually and 

on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

TIKTOK, INC., a corporation, and 

BYTEDANCE, INC., a corporation,

Defendants.

Case No.

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 1 of 18 PageID #:1
2

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Plaintiff C.H., a minor, by and through his guardian, (“Plaintiff), individually 

and on behalf of all others similarly situated, allege as follows against Defendants 

TikTok, Inc. (“TikTok”) both individually and as a successor-in-interest to 

Musical.ly, Inc. (“musical.ly”) and ByteDance, Inc. (“ByteDance”) (collectively, 

“Defendants”): 

I. INTRODUCTION 

1. Defendant TikTok maintains and operates one of the fastest growing 

social media applications in the United States (“App”). The App is a video-sharing 

network that allows users to create, view, and share short videos. 

2. Unknown and undisclosed to its users, the App collects, stores and uses 

private, biometric information and biometric identifiers of users and those whose 

faces appear in users’ videos. 

3. The App scans a user’s facial geometry and its algorithm subsequently 

uses that information to determine an estimate of the user’s age. The App also scans 

facial geometry of any subject that appears in a video to allow users to impose 

animated features onto the video subject’s face or otherwise alter the video subject’s 

face. TikTok encourages users to use these facial effects. 

4. Defendants’ collection, storage, and use of biometric identifiers or 

biometric information is in violation of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy 

Act, 740 ILCS 14/1 et seq. (“BIPA”). 

5. Despite the BIPA’s requirement that private entities such as the 

Defendants receive informed consent prior to the collection of biometric identifiers 

or information, Defendants do not inform users that the App collects, captures, 

receives, obtains, stores, or otherwise uses the biometric identifiers or biometric 

information of users or the biometric identifiers or biometric information of their

video subjects. Given that users are not informed of Defendants’ collection of 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 2 of 18 PageID #:2
3

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

biometric identifiers or biometric information, users cannot, and have not, provided 

informed consent. 

6. Defendants separately violate the BIPA by failing to develop a written 

policy, made available to the public, that establishes the retention schedule and 

guidelines for permanently destroying biometric data. Defendants do not disclose 

what they do with the biometric data, who has access to that biometric data, where 

that biometric data is stored, how long that biometric data is stored, or any guidelines 

for the destruction of biometric data. 

7. Plaintiff brings this action individually and on behalf of a proposed 

class to enjoin Defendants’ ongoing violations of the BIPA and to recover statutory 

damages for Plaintiff and Class members for each violation of the BIPA by the 

Defendants. 

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

8. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act, 

28 U.S.C. § 1332(d). This is a class action in which the amount in controversy is in 

excess of $5,000,000, excluding interest and costs. Putative Class members and 

Defendants are citizens of different states. There are more than 100 putative Class 

members. 

9. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants. Both Defendants 

regularly conduct business in the State of California, including, actions associated 

with the misconduct described in this Complaint. Both Defendants maintain their 

principal places of business in California, and Defendant TikTok, Inc. is 

incorporated in California. 

10. Venue is proper in the jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b), 

(c), and (d), because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to 

Plaintiff’s claims occurred in this District. TikTok maintains its principal place of 

business in this District. 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 3 of 18 PageID #:3
4

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

III. PARTIES 

11. Plaintiff C.H. is a 16-year old minor and a resident and citizen of 

Illinois. C.H. brings this action through his father and guardian, Marc Halpin, who 

is also a resident and citizen of Illinois.

12. C.H. is a registered user of the TikTok App and has used the App 

regularly to upload videos and use the App’s facial filters on his own image and the 

images of others who appeared in his videos.

13. Plaintiff did not know or expect that Defendants collect, store, and use 

his biometric identifiers and biometric information when he uses the App or that 

Defendants collect, store, and use the biometric identifiers and biometric information 

of others whose faces appear in his videos. If Plaintiff had known, Plaintiff would 

not have used the App. 

14. Neither Plaintiff, nor his legally authorized guardian, ever received 

notice from Defendants (written or otherwise) that Defendants would collect, store, 

or use his biometric identifiers or biometric information or that Defendants would 

collect, store, or use the biometric identifiers or biometric information of those 

whose faces appeared in videos he uploaded to the App.

15. Neither Plaintiff, nor his legally authorized guardian, ever received 

notice from Defendants of the specific purpose and length of time that Defendants 

would collect, store, or use Plaintiff’s biometric identifiers or biometric information 

or the specific purpose and length of time that Defendants would collect, store, or 

use the biometric identifiers or biometric information of those whose faces appeared 

in Plaintiff’s videos. 

16. Neither Plaintiff, nor his legally authorized guardian, recall seeing the 

Terms of Service or Privacy Policies upon registered for an account with the App. 

Plaintiff does not recall seeing any notification from Defendants regarding changes 

to these policies. 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 4 of 18 PageID #:4
5

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

17. Defendant TikTok, Inc. is, and at all relevant times, was, a California 

corporation with its principal place of business in Culver City, California. It is sued 

in its individual capacity and as the successor-in-interest to Musical.ly, Inc.

18. Defendant ByteDance Inc. is, and at all relevant times was, a Delaware 

corporation with its principal place of business in Palo Alto, California. ByteDance 

Ltd., a company based in China, is the parent corporation of ByteDance, Inc. 

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

A. Biometrics and Consumer Privacy 

19. Biometrics are unique biological measurements that can be used for 

identification and authentication. 

20. Common biometric identifiers include retina or iris scans, fingerprints 

voiceprints, fingerprints, and scans of hand or face geometry. 

21. Recent improvements in facial recognition software has resulted in the 

growing capture, collection, and use of biometric data in commercial applications. 

The rise in commercial applications of facial recognition technology has also 

generated significant concern about the erosion of personal privacy and the potential 

for abuse inherent in the collection of an individual’s unique biological information. 

22. Despite the privacy concerns raised by regulators, legislators, and 

others, Defendants failed to obtain consent from Plaintiff and Class members before 

it employed its facial recognition technology on their images. 

B. The Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act

23. Illinois recognizes that biometrics are unlike other unique identifiers 

such as social security numbers or a driver’s license that, when compromised, can 

be changed. Biometrics “are biologically unique to the individual”; therefore, “once 

compromised, the individual has no resource” and “is at heightened risk of identity 

theft.” 740 ILCS 14/15. To protect the biometric identifiers and biometric 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 5 of 18 PageID #:5
6

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

information of Illinois citizens, like the Plaintiff and Class members, Illinois enacted 

the Illinois Biometric and Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”) in 2008. 

24. Section 15(b) of the BIPA provides that no private entity, such as the 

Defendants, may collect, capture, or otherwise obtain a person’s or a customer’s 

biometric identifier or biometric information, unless it first: 

(1) informs the subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative in writing that a biometric identifier or biometric information is being 

collected or stored; 

(2) informs the subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative in writing of the specific purpose and length of term for which a 

biometric identifier or biometric information is being collected, stored 

and used; and 

(3) receives a written release executed by the subject of the biometric identifier or biometric information or the subject's legally authorized 

representative. 

740 ILCS 14/15(b). 

25. The statute defines a “written release” to mean “informed written 

consent.” Id. 

26. Section 15(a) of BIPA provides: 

A private entity in possession of biometric identifiers or biometric 

information must develop a written policy, made available to the public, 

establishing a retention schedule and guidelines for permanently 

destroying biometric identifiers and biometric information when the 

initial purpose for collecting or obtaining such identifiers or 

information has been satisfied or within 3 years of the individual’s last 

interaction with the private entity, whichever comes first. 

740 ILCS 14/15(a).

27. Section 15(c) of BIPA provides that no private entity, such as the 

Defendants, in possession of biometric identifier or biometric information “may 

disclose, redisclose, or otherwise disseminate a person’s or a customer’s biometric 

identifier or biometric information” unless “the subject of the biometric identifier or 

biometric information or the subject’s legally authorized representative consents to 

the disclosure or redisclosure.” 740 ILCS 14/15(d)(1). 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 6 of 18 PageID #:6
7

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

28. Within the definition of a “biometric identifier” in the BIPA, it

specifically includes “a retina or iris scan, fingerprint, voiceprint, or scan of hand or 

face geometry.” 740 ILCS 14/10. The statute defines “biometric information” to 

mean “any information, regardless of how it is captured, converted, stored, or shared,

based on an individual’s biometric identifier used to identify an individual.” Id. 

29. BIPA further prohibits a private entity, such as the Defendants, that 

possess biometric identifiers or biometric information from selling, leasing, trading, 

or otherwise profiting from a person’s or a customer’s biometric identifier or 

biometric information. 740 ILCS 14/15(c). 

30. Any private entity that possesses biometric identifiers or biometric 

information is required to store, transmit, and protect the biometric identifiers and 

biometric information using the “reasonable standard of care within the private 

entity’s industry.” 740 ILCS 14/15(e). 

C. Defendants Violate Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act

31. ByteDance Inc. is a Delaware corporation. Its parent company, 

ByteDance Ltd., is based in China. 

32. ByteDance Ltd. initially launched the TikTok App (originally called 

“A.me” in China but now called “Douyin”) in China. In 2016, the App was launched 

for iOS and Android in markets outside of China. 

33. In 2017, ByteDance purchased musical.ly., a video-based social 

network that, like the TikTok App, allowed users to create and share short videos. 

Paul Mozur, Musical.ly, a Chinese App Big in the U.S., Sells for $1 Billion, New 

York Times (Nov. 10, 2017), available at https://nyti.ms/2zKQtZv (last accessed 

May 28, 2020). The Musical.ly App collected, used, stored, and otherwise obtained 

face scans of users and video subjects to allow the use of face filters without 

informed consent in violation of the BIPA. TikTok merged the TikTok App with the 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 7 of 18 PageID #:7
8

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Musical.ly App to create a single video-based social network under the “TikTok” 

name. 

34. The TikTok App has become one of the fastest growing social media 

platforms worldwide and in the United States. It has been downloaded more than 1.3 

billion times worldwide and more than 120 million times in the United States. 

35. The TikTok App is immensely popular with a younger demographic. 

“About 60% of TikTok’s 26.5 million monthly active users in the United States are 

between the ages of 16 and 24.” Greg Roumeliotis, et al., U.S. Opens National 

Security Investigation into TikTok, Reuters (Nov. 1, 2019), available at 

https://reut.rs/2yFv7fC (last accessed May 28, 2020). 

36. The TikTok App uses an artificial intelligence tool that automatically 

scans the faces of individuals appearing in videos posted to the App to estimate the 

subjects’ ages. See, e.g., Georgia Wells Yoree Koh, TikTok Wants to Grow Up but 

Finds it Tough to Keep Kids Out, Wall Street Journal (Feb. 16, 2020), available at 

https://on.wsj.com/2ZL9uFV (last accessed May 28, 2020). 

37. The TikTok App also contains a feature that permits users to 

superimpose facial features onto a subject’s moving face and which allows for 

editing of facial features. These features work by scanning the unique facial 

geometry of individuals, like Plaintiff and Class members, that appear in videos 

posted to the TikTok App. 

38. Embedded within the App is another feature that “is designed to let 

users’ face-swap onto a selection of source videos” which “requires TikTok users to 

create a detailed multiple-angle biometric scan of their faces.” Peter Suciu, TikTok’s 

Deepfakes Just the Latest Security Issue for the Video Sharing App Forbes (Jan. 7, 

2020), available at < https://bit.ly/3ero9du> (last accessed May 28, 2020). 

39. TikTok’s features that result in the capture, collection, and use of scans 

of facial geometry and facial features raise significant privacy concerns. 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 8 of 18 PageID #:8
9

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

40. Upon information and belief, Defendant TikTok shares its users’ 

private information, including biometric identifiers and information, with other 

members of its corporate family during the Class period, including Defendant 

ByteDance., and with its advertising partners. See, e.g. TikTok Privacy Policy (as of 

May 28, 2020), available at https://www.tiktok.com/legal/privacy-policy?lang=en

(last accessed May 28, 2020). According to a ByteDance representative “that people 

made their faces available to other platforms, too.” Jay Tolentino, How TikTok Holds 

Our Attention (Sept. 23, 2019), The New Yorker, available at < 

https://bit.ly/3dcku2N> (last accessed May 28, 2020). 

41. Defendants’ capture, collection and use of Plaintiff’s and Class 

members’ biometric identifiers or biometric information, including but not limited 

to scans of facial geometry and/or facial landmarks, violates all three prongs of 

Section 15(b) of the BIPA. 

42. First, Defendants do not inform Plaintiff or Class members or their 

legally authorized representatives that it collects, captures, receives, obtains, stores, 

shares or uses their biometric identifiers or biometric information, as required by 

Section 15(b)(1). 

43. Second, Defendants do not inform Plaintiff or Class members or their 

legally authorized representatives in writing (or otherwise) of the specific purpose 

and length of term for which a biometric identifier or biometric information is being 

collected, stored, or used, as required by Section (b)(2). 

44. Third, Defendants have never obtained a written release or consent 

from Plaintiff or Class members or their legally authorized representatives before 

the collection, capture, storage, and/or use of their biometric identifiers and 

biometric information, as required by Section 15(b)(3). 

45. Defendants also violate Section 15(a) of BIPA, by failing to develop a 

written policy, made available to the public, establishing a retention schedule and 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 9 of 18 PageID #:9
10

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

guidelines for permanently destroying biometric identifiers and biometric 

information when the initial purpose for collecting or obtaining such identifiers or 

information has been satisfied or within 3 years of the individual’s last interaction 

with the TikTok App, whichever occurs first. 

46. Defendants’ violation of the BIPA have harmed Plaintiff by, among 

other things, violating their privacy and taking away their right to maintain and 

control their biometric identifiers and biometric information. Defendants’ privacy 

invasions are especially troubling given that many of its users are minors. 

V. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

47. Plaintiff brings this lawsuit pursuant to Rule 23(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), and 

(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on behalf of the following Class: 

48. All individuals who had their biometric identifiers or biometric 

information, including scans of face geometry, collected, captured, received, or 

otherwise obtained by the Defendants through the Musical.ly or the TikTok App, 

while residing in Illinois. 

49. Excluded from the Class are Defendants, as well as its legal 

representatives, officers, employees, assigns and successors, as well as all past and 

present employees, officers, and directors of Defendants. Also excluded from the 

Class is any judge or judicial officer who presides over this action and members of 

their immediate families and judicial staff. 

50. Plaintiff reserves the right to amend the class definition based on 

information obtained through discovery or further investigation. 

51. Numerosity: The number of Class members is so numerous that joinder 

is impracticable. Plaintiff will be able to determine the exact number of Class 

members and identify each Class member through appropriate discovery, including 

discovery of Defendants’ business records. Class members can be ascertained by 

objective criteria, such as use and geographic information. At a minimum, the Class 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 10 of 18 PageID #:10
11

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

contains thousands of persons. The disposition of Class members’ claims in a single 

action will benefit the parties and the Court. 

52. Commonality: There are questions of law and fact common to Plaintiff 

and all Class members that predominate over any questions that affect any individual 

Class member, including but not limited to: 

a. Whether Defendants collected, stored, or otherwise used 

Plaintiff’s and Class members’ biometric identifiers or biometric 

information; 

b. Whether Defendants properly informed Plaintiff and Class 

members that it collected, stored, or otherwise used their 

biometric identifiers or biometric information; 

c. Whether Defendants informed Plaintiff and Class members of 

the specific purpose and length of term for which their biometric 

identifier or biometric information would be collected, stored, 

and/or used; 

d. Whether Defendants obtained written release (as defined in 740 

ILCS 14/10) from Plaintiff and Class members to collect, store, 

and/or use their biometric identifiers or biometric information; 

e. Whether Defendants developed a written policy, made available 

to the public, including Plaintiff and Class members, that 

established a retention schedule and guidelines for permanently 

destroying biometric identifiers and biometric information; 

f. Whether Defendants’ violations of the BIPA were committed 

intentionally, recklessly, or negligently; 

g. Whether Plaintiff and Class members are entitled to statutory damages under the BIPA; and

h. Whether Plaintiff and Class members are entitled to declaratory 

and injunctive relief. 

53. Typicality: All of Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the 

proposed Class he seeks to represent. His claims arise from the same conduct and 

practices that give rise to the claims of all Class members and are based on the same 

legal theories. Plaintiff, like all Class members, has had his biometric identifiers or 

biometric information collected, stored, and/or used by Defendants without his

knowledge and without his informed consent. 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 11 of 18 PageID #:11
12

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

54. Adequacy of Representation: Plaintiff will fairly and adequately 

represent the interests of the Class. Plaintiff has no interest adverse to those of other 

Class members and is committed to vigorously prosecuting this case. Plaintiff has 

retained counsel skilled and experienced in consumer class actions and complex 

litigation. 

55. Superiority: A class action is superior to all other available methods for 

the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy. Class treatment of common 

questions is superior to multiple individual actions that would risk inconsistent or 

contradictory judgments and increase the costs of resolving this matter for all parties 

and the court system. By contrast, a class action presents far fewer management 

difficulties and offers the benefit of a single adjudication, economies of scale, and 

comprehensive supervision by a single court. Absent a class action, Class members 

would find the cost of litigating their BIPA claims prohibitively high and would have 

no effective remedy. A class action promotes orderly adjudication of the Class 

claims and presents fewer management difficulties. 

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Violations of 740 ILCS 14/15(b)

56. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth 

herein. 

57. Defendants are “private entities” as defined by 740 ILCS 14/10 because 

Defendant TikTok is a California corporation and Defendant ByteDance, Inc. is a 

Delaware corporation. 

58. Plaintiff and Class members are individuals who had their biometric 

identifiers or biometric information collected, captured, received, obtained, stored, 

and/or used by Defendants through the TikTok App. 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 12 of 18 PageID #:12
13

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

59. In violation of 740 ILCS 14/15(b)(1), Defendants did not inform 

Plaintiff and Class members or their legally authorized representatives in writing 

that their biometric identifiers or biometric information would be collected or stored.

60. In violation of 740 ILCS 14/15(b)(2), Defendants did not inform 

Plaintiff and Class members or their legally authorized representative in writing of 

the specific purpose and length of term for which a biometric identifier or biometric 

information is being collected, stored, and used. 

61. In violation of 740 ILCS 14/15(b)(3), Defendants collected, captured, 

received, otherwise obtained, stored, and/or used Plaintiff’s and Class members’ 

biometric identifiers and information without first obtaining a written release. 

62. By collecting, capturing, receiving, otherwise obtaining, storing, and/or 

using Plaintiff’s and the other Class members’ biometric identifiers and biometric 

information, Defendants violated the rights of Plaintiff and Class members to keep 

private these biometric identifiers and biometric information. 

63. These privacy violations already have harmed Plaintiff and the other 

Class members and will continue to harm, in an amount to be proven at trial. 

64. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ violations of 740 ILSC 

14/15(b) were intentional or reckless. Defendants deliberately designed and 

implemented the artificial intelligence tools and facial filters in the TikTok App that 

collect, capture, receive, otherwise obtain, store, and/or use biometric identifiers and 

biometric information. In addition, Defendants intentionally or recklessly did not

obtain informed consent before it collected, captured, received, or otherwise 

obtained, stored, and/or used Plaintiff’s and Class members’ biometric identifiers or 

biometric information. In the alternative, Defendants acted negligently by failing

ensure that TikTok App users were informed of and consented to Defendants’ 

collecting, capturing, receiving, otherwise obtaining, storing, and/or using their 

biometric information and biometric identifiers. 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 13 of 18 PageID #:13
14

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

65. Individually and on behalf of the Class, Plaintiff seeks: (1) injunctive 

and equitable relief as is necessary to protect the interests of Plaintiff and Class 

members by requiring Defendants to comply with BIPA’s requirements for the 

collection, capture, storage, and use of biometric identifiers and biometric 

information; (2) statutory damages of $5,000 for each intentional and reckless 

violation of BIPA pursuant to 740 ILSC 14/20(2) or, alternatively, statutory damages 

of $1,000 for each negligent violation pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/20(1); and (3) 

reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs and other litigation expenses pursuant to 740 

ILCS 14/20(3). 

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Violations of 740 ILCS 14/15(a)

66. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth 

herein. 

67. Defendants are “private entities” as defined by 740 ILCS 14/10 because 

Defendant TikTok is a California corporation and Defendant ByteDance, Inc. is a 

Delaware corporation.

68. Plaintiff and Class members are individuals who had their biometric 

identifiers or biometric information collected, captured, received, obtained, stored, 

and/or used by Defendants through the TikTok App. 

69. BIPA requires that private entities in possession of biometric data 

develop a written policy, made available to the public, establishing a retention 

schedule and guidelines for permanently destroying biometric identifiers and 

biometric information when the initial purpose for collecting or obtaining such 

identifiers or information has been satisfied or within 3 years of the individual’s last 

interaction with the private entity, whichever occurs first. Pursuant to BIPA, such 

companies must adhere to that retention schedule and actually delete the biometric 

information. See 740 ILCS § 14/15(a). 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 14 of 18 PageID #:14
15

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

70. Defendants possess the biometric identifiers or information of Plaintiff 

and the other Class members but do not publicly provide a retention schedule or 

guidelines for permanently destroying such identifiers or information, as required by 

740 ILCS 2313/15(a). 

71. Upon information and belief, Defendants do not maintain retention 

schedules and guidelines for permanently destroying Plaintiff’s and the other Class 

members’ biometric data. Each Defendant has failed or does not intend to destroy 

Plaintiff’s and the other Class members’ biometric data when the initial purpose for 

collecting or obtaining such data has been satisfied or within three years of the 

individual’s last interaction with the company. 

72. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ BIPA violations were 

intentional and reckless because Defendants deliberately failed to publicly disclose 

a retention schedule or guidelines for permanently destroying biometric identifiers 

or biometric information, as required by 740 ILCS 2313/15(a). 

73. Alternatively, Defendants’ BIPA violations were negligent because 

Defendants breached the applicable standard of care by failing to publicly provide a 

retention schedule or guidelines for permanently destroying such identifiers or 

information, as required by 740 ILCS 2314/15(a). 

74. Individually and on behalf of the Class, Plaintiff seeks: (1) injunctive 

and equitable relief as is necessary to protect the interests of Plaintiff and Class 

members by requiring Defendants to comply with BIPA’s requirements for the 

collection, capture, storage, and use of biometric identifiers and biometric 

information; (2) statutory damages of $5,000 for each intentional and reckless 

violation of BIPA pursuant to 740 ILSC 14/20(2) or, alternatively, statutory damages 

of $1,000 for each negligent violation pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/20(1); and (3) 

reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs and other litigation expenses pursuant to 740 

ILCS 14/20(3). 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 15 of 18 PageID #:15
16

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Violations of 740 ILCS 14/15(d)

75. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth 

herein. 

76. Defendants are “private entities” as defined by 740 ILCS 14/10 because 

Defendant TikTok is a California corporation and Defendant ByteDance, Inc. is a 

Delaware corporation.

77. Plaintiff and Class members are individuals who had their biometric 

identifiers or biometric information collected, captured, received, obtained, stored, 

and/or used by Defendants through the TikTok App. 

78. BIPA prohibits private entities from disclosing, redisclosing, or 

otherwise disseminating a person’s or a customer’s biometric identifiers or biometric 

information without first obtaining consent for that disclosure. 740 ILCS 

14/15(d)(1). 

79. Defendants disclosed, redisclosed, or otherwise disseminated Plaintiff 

and Class members’ biometric identifiers and biometric information without the 

required consent pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/15(d)(1).

80. By disclosing, redisclosing, or otherwise disseminating Plaintiff’s and 

other Class members’ biometric identifiers and biometric information, Defendants 

violated Plaintiff’s and Class members’ right to maintain control over their biometric 

identifiers and/or biometric information as codified in BIPA. 740 ILCS 1411, et seq. 

81. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ BIPA violations were 

intentional and reckless because Defendants deliberately disseminated Plaintiff’s 

and Class members’ biometric identifiers and biometric information without first 

obtaining the required consent. 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 16 of 18 PageID #:16
17

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

82. Alternatively, Defendants’ BIPA violations were negligent because 

Defendants negligently disseminated Plaintiff’s and Class members’ biometric 

identifiers and biometric information without first obtaining the required consent. 

83. Individually and on behalf of the Class, Plaintiff seeks: (1) injunctive 

and equitable relief as is necessary to protect the interests of Plaintiff and Class 

members by requiring Defendants to comply with BIPA’s requirements for the 

collection, capture, storage, and use of biometric identifiers and biometric 

information; (2) statutory damages of $5,000 for each intentional and reckless 

violation of BIPA pursuant to 740 ILSC 14/20(2) or, alternatively, statutory damages 

of $1,000 for each negligent violation pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/20(1); and (3) 

reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs and other litigation expenses pursuant to 740 

ILCS 14/20(3). 

VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

84. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all other 

similarly situated, requests that the Court enter the following judgment against 

Defendants: 

a. That this action and the proposed class be certified and 

maintained as a class action, appointing Plaintiff as a proper 

representative of the Class herein, and appointing the attorneys 

and law firm representing Plaintiff as counsel for the Class; 

b. Enter judgment against Defendants on Plaintiff’s and Class 

members’ asserted causes of action; 

c. Award statutory damages of $5,000 for each intentional and 

reckless violation of BIPA pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/20(2), award

statutory damages of $1,000 for each negligent violation of BIPA 

pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/20(1); 

d. Award injunctive and other equitable relief as is necessary to 

protect the interests of the Class, including, inter alia, an order 

requiring TikTok to collect, store, and use biometric identifiers 

or biometric information in compliance with BIPA; 

e. Award Plaintiff and the Class their reasonable litigation expenses 

and attorneys’ fees; 

f. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as provided by law; and 

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 17 of 18 PageID #:17
18

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

g. Such additional and equitable relief that this Court may deem just 

and proper. 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable pursuant to 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b). 

Dated: June 5, 2010 Respectfully submitted,

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

/s/ Steven Sklaver . Steven Sklaver 

Kalpana Srinivasan 

Michael Gervais 

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Proposed Class

Case: 1:20-cv-05213 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 18 of 18 PageID #:18