Case: Tan v. City of San Jose

5:26-cv-03181 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: April 15, 2026

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case challenged San Jose's AI-enhanced automatic license plate reader system that photographed and tracked every passing vehicle without warrants. On April 15, 2026, three individual residents of San Jose, California filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Plaintiffs sought to represent a putative class of all San Jose residents who were drivers of vehicles photographed by the city's surveillance cameras after April 15, 2025. Represented by Michel & Assoc…

This case challenged San Jose's AI-enhanced automatic license plate reader system that photographed and tracked every passing vehicle without warrants.

On April 15, 2026, three individual residents of San Jose, California filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Plaintiffs sought to represent a putative class of all San Jose residents who were drivers of vehicles photographed by the city's surveillance cameras after April 15, 2025. Represented by Michel & Associates and the Institute for Justice, they sued the City of San Jose, the San Jose Police Department (SJPD), and the San Jose Chief of Police. The plaintiffs alleged that defendants installed 474 AI-enhanced automatic license plate reader (ALPR) cameras throughout San Jose that automatically photograph every passing vehicle, use artificial intelligence to analyze the images and create "Vehicle Fingerprint" data, and store this information in a centralized database for 30 days. According to the complaint, this system collected over 360 million images in 2024 alone and was searched nearly 2.5 million times every six months by over 1,000 SJPD employees and hundreds of other government entities across California. The plaintiffs contended that this surveillance occurred without warrants, probable cause, or individualized suspicion, and that the data was shared with nearly 300 other government entities. The plaintiffs brought the lawsuit as a civil rights action under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that the ALPR camera system constituted an unreasonable search in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The plaintiffs sought declaratory relief, a permanent injunction requiring deletion of images and data within 24 hours unless defendants obtained a warrant based on probable cause, nominal damages of $1.00 for each named plaintiff, and attorneys' fees.

This case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi.

As of April 202, this case is ongoing.

Summary Authors

Claire Pollard (4/16/2026)

Haleigh Knowles (4/19/2026)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73192632/parties/tan-v-city-of-san-jose/


Judge(s)

Demarchi, Virginia K. (California)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Barvir, Anna Marie (California)

Frommer, Robert Peller (California)

Soyfer, Michael Benjamin (California)

Woislaw, Daniel T. (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case
1

5:26-cv-03181

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

April 15, 2026

April 15, 2026

Complaint

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73192632/tan-v-city-of-san-jose/

Last updated July 28, 2026, 3:49 p.m.

Docket for: Tan v. City of San Jose
ECF Number Date Description Link
1 April 15, 2026

COMPLAINT for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief against City of San Jose, Paul Joseph, San Jose Police Department ( Filing fee $ 405, receipt number ACANDC-21869842.). Filed by Zhaocheng Anthony Tan, Colin Wolfson, Scott West. (Barvir, Anna) (Filed on 4/15/2026) (Entered: 04/15/2026)

Clearinghouse
2 April 15, 2026

Proposed Summons. (Barvir, Anna) (Filed on 4/15/2026) (Entered: 04/15/2026)

RECAP
3 April 15, 2026

Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 4/29/2026. (dso, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/15/2026) (Entered: 04/15/2026)

RECAP
4 April 15, 2026

MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice for Robert Frommer ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number ACANDC-21871361.) filed by Zhaocheng Anthony Tan, Scott West, Colin Wolfson. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Good Standing)(Frommer, Robert) (Filed on 4/15/2026) (Entered: 04/15/2026)

1 Certificate of Good Standing

View on PACER

RECAP
5 April 15, 2026

MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice for Michael Soyfer ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number ACANDC-21871489.) filed by Zhaocheng Anthony Tan, Scott West, Colin Wolfson. (Attachments: # 1 DC Certificate of Good Standing, # 2 NY Certificate of Good Standing)(Soyfer, Michael) (Filed on 4/15/2026) (Entered: 04/15/2026)

1 DC Certificate of Good Standing

View on PACER

2 NY Certificate of Good Standing

View on PACER

RECAP
6 April 15, 2026

MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice for Daniel Woislaw ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number ACANDC-21871570.) filed by Zhaocheng Anthony Tan, Scott West, Colin Wolfson. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Good Standing)(Woislaw, Daniel) (Filed on 4/15/2026) (Entered: 04/15/2026)

1 Certificate of Good Standing

View on PACER

RECAP
7 April 15, 2026

ORDER Granting 4 Application for Admission of Attorney Pro Hac Vice for Robert Frommer. Signed by Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi on 4/15/2026. (smc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/15/2026) (Entered: 04/15/2026)

RECAP
8 April 15, 2026

ORDER Granting 5 Application for Admission of Attorney Pro Hac Vice for Michael Soyfer. Signed by Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi on 4/15/2026. (smc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/15/2026) (Entered: 04/15/2026)

RECAP
9 April 15, 2026

ORDER Granting 6 Application for Admission of Attorney Pro Hac Vice for Daniel Woislaw. Signed by Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi on 4/15/2026. (smc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/15/2026) (Entered: 04/15/2026)

RECAP
April 15, 2026

~Util - Case Assigned by Intake

10 April 16, 2026

Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 7/14/2026. Initial Case Management Conference set for 7/21/2026 01:30 PM in San Jose, - Videoconference Only. (kam2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/16/2026)

RECAP
11 April 16, 2026

Summons Issued as to City of San Jose, Paul Joseph, San Jose Police Department. (kam2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/16/2026)

RECAP
12 April 17, 2026

Certificate of Interested Entities by Zhaocheng Anthony Tan, Scott West, Colin Wolfson (Soyfer, Michael) (Filed on 4/17/2026) (Entered: 04/17/2026)

RECAP
13 April 29, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Zhaocheng Anthony Tan, Scott West, Colin Wolfson for service on all defendants (Soyfer, Michael) (Filed on 4/29/2026)

RECAP
14 May 6, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance filed by Julia Weiland Van Roo on behalf of City of San Jose, Paul Joseph, San Jose Police Department (Van Roo, Julia) (Filed on 5/6/2026)

RECAP
15 May 6, 2026

STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re [1] Complaint, Enlarging Time for Defendants' Response to Plaintiffs' Complaint filed by City of San Jose, Paul Joseph, San Jose Police Department. (Van Roo, Julia) (Filed on 5/6/2026)

RECAP
May 6, 2026

Notice of Appearance/Substitution/Change/Withdrawal of Attorney

16 May 7, 2026

ORDER Granting [15] Stipulation Enlarging Time for Defendants' Response to Plaintiffs' Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi on 5/7/2026.(vkdlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2026)

RECAP
17 June 9, 2026

CLERK'S NOTICE Re: Consent or Declination: Plaintiffs/Defendants shall file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge. Note that any party is free to withhold consent to proceed before a magistrate judge without adverse substantive consequences. The forms are available at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/civilforms. (Party/parties were also notified via telephone or email.) Consent/Declination due by 6/26/2026. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (smc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/9/2026) (Entered: 06/09/2026)

RECAP
June 9, 2026

Clerk's Notice re: Consent or Declination

18 June 10, 2026

CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Zhaocheng Anthony Tan, Scott West, Colin Wolfson.. (Soyfer, Michael) (Filed on 6/10/2026) (Entered: 06/10/2026)

RECAP
19 June 10, 2026

CLERK'S NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: The Clerk of this Court will now randomly reassign this case to a District Judge because either (1) a party has not consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge, or (2) time is of the essence in deciding a pending judicial action for which the necessary consents to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction have not been secured. You will be informed by separate notice of the district judge to whom this case is reassigned. ALL HEARING DATES PRESENTLY SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CURRENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE ARE VACATED AND SHOULD BE RE-NOTICED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE JUDGE TO WHOM THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED. This is a text only docket entry; there is no document associated with this notice. (smc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/10/2026) (Entered: 06/10/2026)

RECAP
June 10, 2026

Clerk's Notice of Impending Reassignment - Text Only

20 June 11, 2026

ORDER REASSIGNING CASE IT IS ORDERED that this case is reassigned using a proportionate, random and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Beth Labson Freeman. Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi no longer assigned to the case. Counsel are instructed that all future filings shall bear the updated judicial initials immediately after the case number. Counsel are reminded to verify the location of the judge on the court website. All hearing and trial dates presently scheduled are vacated. However, existing briefing schedules for motions remain unchanged. Motions must be renoticed for hearing before the judge to whom the case has been reassigned, but the renoticing of the hearing does not affect the prior briefing schedule. Other deadlines such as those for ADR compliance and discovery cutoff also remain unchanged. Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order 65 and cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Mark B. Busby Clerk, United States District Court (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (chh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/11/2026) (Entered: 06/11/2026)

RECAP
June 11, 2026

Case Assigned/Reassigned

June 11, 2026

CASE REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen for Discovery. (chh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/11/2026)

21 June 12, 2026

CLERKS NOTICE RESETTING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE FOLLOWING RE-ASSIGNMENT. Joint Case Management Statement due by 10/8/2026. Initial Case Management Conference set for 10/15/2026, at 11:00 AM Videoconference Only before Judge Beth Labson Freeman.See Standing Order for All Judges of the Northern District of California: Con-tents of Case Management Statement, available at https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/rules/judges-standing-orders/The Court does not issue a revised Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines. Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges/blf/freeman-beth-l/. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (erm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2026) (Entered: 06/12/2026)

RECAP
June 12, 2026

Clerk's Notice

22 June 25, 2026

MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number ACANDC-22141902.) filed by City of San Jose, Paul Joseph, San Jose Police Department. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement)(Kravis, Jonathan) (Filed on 6/25/2026) (Entered: 06/25/2026)

1 Supplement

View on PACER

RECAP
23 June 25, 2026

MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number ACANDC-22141869.) filed by City of San Jose, Paul Joseph, San Jose Police Department. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement)(Keeley, Charlotte) (Filed on 6/25/2026) (Entered: 06/25/2026)

1 Supplement

View on PACER

RECAP
24 June 26, 2026

MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number ACANDC-22145211.) filed by City of San Jose, Paul Joseph, San Jose Police Department. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement)(Liu, Jessie) (Filed on 6/26/2026) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

1 Supplement

View on PACER

RECAP
25 June 26, 2026

ORDER GRANTING 22 APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE (re attorney Jonathan Kravis). Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 6/26/2026. (blflc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2026) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

RECAP
26 June 26, 2026

ORDER GRANTING 23 APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE (re attorney Charlotte Keeley). Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 6/26/2026.(blflc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2026) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

RECAP
27 June 26, 2026

ORDER GRANTING 24 APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE (re attorney Jessie Liu). Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 6/26/2026. (blflc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2026) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

RECAP
28 June 26, 2026

MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, MOTION to Dismiss filed by City of San Jose, Paul Joseph, San Jose Police Department. Motion Hearing set for 12/3/2026 09:00 AM in San Jose, Courtroom 1, 5th Floor before Judge Beth Labson Freeman. Responses due by 7/10/2026. Replies due by 7/17/2026. Motion to Dismiss Hearing set for 12/3/2026 09:00 AM in San Jose, Courtroom 1, 5th Floor. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Kravis, Jonathan) (Filed on 6/26/2026) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

1 Proposed Order

View on RECAP

RECAP
29 June 29, 2026

STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re 28 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction MOTION to Dismiss To Enlarge Time to Respond filed by Zhaocheng Anthony Tan, Scott West, Colin Wolfson. (Soyfer, Michael) (Filed on 6/29/2026) (Entered: 06/29/2026)

RECAP
30 June 29, 2026

CLERK'S NOTICE resetting Motion Hearing as to 28 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction MOTION to Dismiss . Motion Hearing set for 10/1/2026, at 09:00 AM in San Jose, Courtroom 1, 5th Floor before Judge Beth Labson Freeman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.)(erm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/29/2026) (Entered: 06/29/2026)

RECAP
31 June 29, 2026

STIPULATION AND ORDER ENLARGING TIME FOR PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO 28 DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS (granting 29 ). Response to Motion to Dismiss due by 8/10/2026. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 6/29/2026. (blflc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/29/2026) (Entered: 06/29/2026)

RECAP
June 29, 2026

Clerk's Notice Continuing Motion Hearing AND ~Util - Set Motion and Deadlines/Hearings

June 29, 2026

1 - Terminate Hearings

June 29, 2026

(This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (erm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/29/2026)

Case Details

State / Territory:

California

Case Type(s):

Privacy

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 15, 2026

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Three residents of San Jose, California who seek to represent a class of drivers who were photographed by the defendant's surveillance system

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

Institute for Justice

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Pending

Defendants

City

City of San Jose, a California charter city

San Jose Police Department

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Law-enforcement

Facility Type(s):

Government-run

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201

Constitutional Clause(s):

Unreasonable search and seizure

Other Dockets:

Northern District of California 5:26-cv-03181

Available Documents:

Complaint (any)

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Relief Sought:

Attorneys fees

Damages

Declaratory judgment

Injunction

Relief Granted:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

Policing:

Traffic Stops

Recommended Citation