Ancestry.com Seeks Order Compelling Minors to Arbitrate Illinois Genetic Information Privacy Act Claims

Ancestry.com DNA LLC (“Ancestry”) has reportedly asked the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to order a putative class action lawsuit that was filed on behalf of a group of minors who alleged the company violated the Illinois Genetic Information Privacy Act (“GIPA”) to arbitration.  In Coatney v. Ancestry.com DNA LLC, 7th Cir., No. 22-02813, several parents apparently utilized Ancestry’s genetic services on behalf of their minor children. As part of this process, each parent accepted the Ancestry User Agreement on behalf of their child.  The User Agreement contains a binding arbitration clause.

Several years later, Blackstone Inc. acquired Ancestry.  After that, a proposed collective action lawsuit was filed against Ancestry on behalf of the minors in the Southern District of Illinois.  In the case, the minors claimed Ancestry violated GIPA by sharing their genetic data with Blackstone without authorization.  Ancestry responded by filing a motion to compel the dispute to arbitration based on the terms of its User Agreement.

Last fall, the district court denied Ancestry’s motion to compel arbitration.  According to the court, the plaintiffs did not agree to be bound by the Ancestry User Agreement or the arbitration clause it contained.  In addition, the Southern District of Illinois found the plaintiffs did not receive sufficient benefits from the relationship such that they should be bound to arbitrate. Ancestry then appealed the lower court’s order denying arbitration to the Seventh Circuit.

In a brief filed with the Seventh Circuit this month, Ancestry claimed the minors’ parents were authorized to bind the children to the company’s terms on their behalf and without their child’s consent.  In addition, Ancestry argued the court was required to enforce the arbitration provision under the Federal Arbitration Act.

According to Ancestry’s brief, the issues stated in the case include:

1. Whether a legal guardian who contracts for DNA analysis services on a minor’s behalf binds that minor to an arbitration agreement in the service contract.

2. Whether a legal guardian who contracts to analyze a minor child’s DNA binds that minor to an arbitration clause in the service contract because the minor is closely related to the dispute such that it is foreseeable the minor will be bound.

3. Whether a minor who receives the benefit of DNA analysis services that a legal guardian contracted for is estopped from avoiding an arbitration clause in the service contract.

Please be sure to check back later to see how the Seventh Circuit ultimately rules in this interesting case!

Photo by: Louis Reed on Unsplash