In 2016, people search engine Spokeo—at the time, a small start-up—was sued by Thomas Robins. Robins claimed that the profile Spokeo created from data aggregated from other sources made him seem wealthier and more educated than he was. Robins worried that could hinder his job prospects.

Robins brought a putative class action claiming injury under the 1970 Fair Credit Reporting Act.

A district court ruled in Spokeo’s favor, dismissing the case for lack of Article III standing. The Ninth Circuit sided with Robins.

The Supreme Court sided with Spokeo and ruled that the circuit court had not properly reviewed whether the plaintiff suffered a concrete, real injury. Under the US Constitution, “injury-in-fact” is required for standing to sue in federal court.

Since that ruling, “Spokeo” has become shorthand for attacking standing, especially in class actions.

The Supreme Court is evolving its standing jurisprudence based on the Spokeo v. Robins case, such as in TransUnion v. Ramirez.

In the case, Spokeo faced truly staggering statutory damages—in the billions of dollars—that it was able to avoid.