Panera Bread: Difference between revisions
→Panera Charged Lemonade: 2024 |
|||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
===Panera knowing of a security breach for 8 months yet did nothing=== | ===Panera knowing of a security breach for 8 months yet did nothing=== | ||
{{Main|Panera's failure to disclose a known security breach}} | {{Main|Panera's failure to disclose a known security breach}} | ||
Back in 02 August 2017, security researcher Dylan Houlihan first notified Panera of the breach that allowed hackers to access customers personal information via its website, however the company wouldn't take any action until 8 month later on 02 April 2018.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Shaak |first=Erin |date=6 April 2018 |title=Panera Bread Facing Lawsuit Over Potential Security Breach |url=https://www.classaction.org/blog/panera-bread-facing-lawsuit-over-potential-security-breach |url-status=live |access-date=29 March 2026 |website=ClassAction}}</ref> This would eventually result in a lawsuit 3 days later, however | Back in 02 August 2017, security researcher Dylan Houlihan first notified Panera of the breach that allowed hackers to access customers personal information via its website, however the company wouldn't take any action until 8 month later on 02 April 2018.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Shaak |first=Erin |date=6 April 2018 |title=Panera Bread Facing Lawsuit Over Potential Security Breach |url=https://www.classaction.org/blog/panera-bread-facing-lawsuit-over-potential-security-breach |url-status=live |access-date=29 March 2026 |website=ClassAction}}</ref> This would eventually result in a lawsuit 3 days later, however it was dismissed by the plaintiffs on June 2018.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Bucher |first=Anne |date=7 June 2018 |title=Panera Data Breach Class Action Voluntarily Dismissed by Plaintiffs |url=https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/panera-data-breach-class-action-voluntarily-dismissed-plaintiffs/ |url-status=live |access-date=30 March 2026 |website=Top Class Action}}</ref> | ||
===Discriminating against blind customers<!-- Don't know if settlement case is related to this lawsuit as I can't find any information about it -->=== | ===Discriminating against blind customers<!-- Don't know if settlement case is related to this lawsuit as I can't find any information about it -->=== | ||
The company was involved a class action lawsuits On 20 April 2016 due to allegedly failing to provide accessibility to visually impaired customers on its product and services. Filed by Andres Gomez and Juan Gil, the lawsuits claims the company failed to implement a "blind interface systems which employs an audio interface system, a tactile keyboard, and/or interactive screen reader technology or other auxiliary aids" on its Ipad Touchscreen KIOS systems. Additionally, it also claims the companys Fast Lane pickup session failed to include signs, audio systems, or braille on the shelves for visually impaired customers.<ref name=":0" /> The lawsuit reached a settlement in 2022. <ref>{{Cite web |date=29 April 2016 |title=“Panera 2.0” Ordering System Unaccommodating to Visually Impaired, Consumers Allege |url=https://foodbeveragelitigationupdate.com/panera-2-0-ordering-system-unaccommodating-to-visually-impaired-consumers-allege/ |url-status=live |access-date=29 March 2026 |website=Foodbeveragelitigationupdate}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=29 March 2026 |title=Pouros Ltd vs Elias Stamm |url=https://unicourt.com/case/pc-db5-gonzalez-v-panera-llc-et-al-1025832 |url-status=live |access-date=29 March 2026 |website=Unicourt}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=29 March 2026 |title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION |url=https://dn710900.ca.archive.org/0/items/gov.uscourts.flsd.482785/gov.uscourts.flsd.482785.1.0.pdf |url-status=live |access-date=29 March 2026 |website=Wayback Machine}}</ref> | The company was involved a class action lawsuits On 20 April 2016 due to allegedly failing to provide accessibility to visually impaired customers on its product and services. Filed by Andres Gomez and Juan Gil, the lawsuits claims the company failed to implement a "blind interface systems which employs an audio interface system, a tactile keyboard, and/or interactive screen reader technology or other auxiliary aids" on its Ipad Touchscreen KIOS systems. Additionally, it also claims the companys Fast Lane pickup session failed to include signs, audio systems, or braille on the shelves for visually impaired customers.<ref name=":0" /> The lawsuit reached a settlement in 2022. <ref>{{Cite web |date=29 April 2016 |title=“Panera 2.0” Ordering System Unaccommodating to Visually Impaired, Consumers Allege |url=https://foodbeveragelitigationupdate.com/panera-2-0-ordering-system-unaccommodating-to-visually-impaired-consumers-allege/ |url-status=live |access-date=29 March 2026 |website=Foodbeveragelitigationupdate}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=29 March 2026 |title=Pouros Ltd vs Elias Stamm |url=https://unicourt.com/case/pc-db5-gonzalez-v-panera-llc-et-al-1025832 |url-status=live |access-date=29 March 2026 |website=Unicourt}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=29 March 2026 |title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION |url=https://dn710900.ca.archive.org/0/items/gov.uscourts.flsd.482785/gov.uscourts.flsd.482785.1.0.pdf |url-status=live |access-date=29 March 2026 |website=Wayback Machine}}</ref> | ||