Surveillance Pricing Enforcement: Responding to the California CCPA Sweep and New York’s Algorithmic Pricing Act

Toni Michelle Jackson
Toni Michelle Jackson
Crowell & Moring LLP

Toni Michelle Jackson is a first-chair litigator with more than 15 years of government service, she leads class and collective actions, multidistrict litigation, and other complex matters in federal and state courts, and advises clients facing State Attorneys General investigations, inquiries, and litigation.

Joanna Rosen Forster
Joanna Rosen Forster
Crowell & Moring LLP

Joanna Rosen Forster is a bet-the-company litigator, she represents companies from startups to publicly traded enterprises in high-stakes litigation, class actions, and government investigations, with a focus on technology, digital assets, e-commerce, and AI.

Live Video-Broadcast: September 23, 2026

2 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

The Enforcement Letters Are Already Out

January 2026 changed the posture on surveillance pricing. California's Attorney General opened an investigative sweep of businesses that use consumer personal information to set individualized prices. New York's Attorney General sent a demand letter to Instacart under the state's Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act. Personalized pricing moved from legislative debate to active state enforcement.

The exposure is already concrete. Use personal data for unexpected price targeting and the CCPA sweep treats it as unlawful data processing. Deploy algorithmic pricing without clear and conspicuous disclosure and N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 349-a exposure follows. Share pricing algorithms through a common vendor and California AB 325 adds Cartwright Act risk. Platform liability extends to third-party partners using marketplace pricing tools.

Attendees walk out with a structured audit of client personalization and pricing practices across four compliance tracks. A practical checklist flags gaps in client data flows, vendor contracts, privacy policies, and consumer-facing opt-out mechanisms. The program closes with scalable compliance frameworks built for the rapidly expanding multi-state legislative landscape rather than state-by-state point solutions.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • California Sweep Theories
    The CCPA legal theories behind the Attorney General's surveillance pricing enforcement sweep.
  • CCPA And ADMT Duties
    Purpose limitation, notice obligations, and ADMT opt-out requirements under the 2026 regulations.
  • Cartwright Act Exposure
    Shared pricing algorithm risk under California AB 325 for third-party vendor users.
  • Client Audit Roadmap
    Data mapping, vendor diligence, and risk assessment readiness before enforcement letters arrive.
  • Section 349-a Enforcement
    Statute scope, penalties, platform liability, and the Instacart demand as enforcement template.
  • Scalable Compliance Architecture
    Trigger analysis, disclosure placement, vendor risk, and the multi-state legislative horizon.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: September 23, 2026 

  • 12:00 pm – 2:10 pm Eastern
  • 11:00 am – 1:10 pm Central
  • 10:00 am – 12:10 pm Mountain
  • 9:00 am – 11:10 am Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Toni Michelle Jackson, Partner | Crowell & Moring LLP

Toni Michelle Jackson is a partner at Crowell & Moring LLP and chair of the firm’s State Attorneys General Practice Group. A first-chair litigator with more than 15 years of government service, she leads class and collective actions, multidistrict litigation, and other complex matters in federal and state courts, and advises clients facing State Attorneys General investigations, inquiries, and litigation.

  • Education & Credentials

Toni earned her B.B.A. from The George Washington University in 1988 and her J.D. from the University of Minnesota Law School in 1991. She is admitted in the District of Columbia and Minnesota and before the Supreme Court of the United States, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, and several federal district courts. She began her career as a law clerk to the Hon. Gerald W. Heaney of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and later clerked for the Hon. John M. “Jack” Mason of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.

  • Recognition & Leadership

While serving as Deputy Attorney General in the Public Interest Division of the District of Columbia Office of the Attorney General from 2018 to 2021, Toni received the Attorney General’s Award for Outstanding Head of a Division in recognition of her contributions in leadership, service, and training. Her earlier leadership roles at the office include Chief of the Equity Section from 2015 to 2018 and Chief of General Litigation Section III of the Civil Litigation Division.

  • Professional Involvement

Toni chairs Crowell & Moring’s State Attorneys General Practice Group and is a member of the District of Columbia Bar and the U.S. Supreme Court Bar. Her recent speaking engagements include “Ensuring and Protecting Access to the Courts” at the DAGA Denver Policy Conference in September 2025.

  • Experience

Toni served as Senior Trial Attorney in the Employment Litigation Section of the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division from 2008 to 2015 and held Assistant Attorney General and section leadership roles in the District of Columbia. Her representative matters include defending a major railroad in multidistrict litigation alleging a multibillion-dollar conspiracy to fix fuel prices, representing a leading e-commerce platform in a major antitrust lawsuit filed by the D.C. Attorney General challenging nationwide pricing policies, and representing a leading online retailer in a multistate Attorneys General investigation into driver tips. She also defends wage and hour class and collective actions under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws in federal courts across the country.

 

Joanna Rosen Forster, Partner | Crowell & Moring LLP

Joanna Rosen Forster is a partner at Crowell & Moring LLP and a member of the firm’s State Attorneys General Practice. A bet-the-company litigator, she represents companies from startups to publicly traded enterprises in high-stakes litigation, class actions, and government investigations, with a focus on technology, digital assets, e-commerce, and AI.

  • Education & Credentials

Joanna earned her J.D. from the University of California, Berkeley School of Law in 2006 and her B.A. in Political Science from the University of California, Berkeley in 2000. She is admitted in California and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the Northern, Central, Eastern, and Southern Districts of California. She served as a law clerk to the Hon. Consuelo B. Marshall of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Joanna received the 2025 Burton Award for Distinguished Legal Writing and was named a Leading Commercial Litigator for 2026 by the Daily Journal. She previously served as Deputy Attorney General in the Corporate Fraud Section of the California Department of Justice from 2015 to 2021 and as General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer of ContextLogic, Inc., a publicly traded e-commerce platform operating in over 60 countries.

  • Professional Involvement

Joanna serves on the board of the Jewish Community Center of San Francisco and on the Family Services Committee of Family House Inc. She frequently speaks and publishes on issues integral to her practice, including a June 2026 Crowell & Moring webinar on surveillance and personalized pricing.

  • Experience

Joanna secured a jury verdict, judgment, and an eight-figure damages award for c3.ai, a leading enterprise AI software and application company, in a Delaware Superior Court matter alleging misappropriation of trade secrets and breach of contract. Her other representative matters include defending a major retail platform against class action allegations of deceptive and unfair pricing practices and misleading online disclosures, and defending a nationwide e-tailer against claims of deceptive pricing and illegal processing of personal data. Earlier in her career, she served on the litigation team that secured over $1 billion in recovery for CalPERS and CalSTRS in residential mortgage-backed securities matters, work recognized with the Attorney General’s Award for Excellence in 2019.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – Auditing Client Personalization Practices Against California’s Surveillance Pricing Sweep | 12:00pm – 1:00pm

This session examines California’s January 2026 investigative sweep targeting businesses that use consumer personal information to set individualized prices, analyzing the CCPA legal theories the Attorney General is pursuing and the overlapping regulatory obligations now in effect. Attorneys will learn how to conduct a structured audit of client personalization and pricing practices across four compliance tracks: CCPA purpose limitation and notice, ADMT opt-out obligations, Cartwright Act shared-algorithm exposure under AB 325, and mandatory risk assessment readiness. Participants will leave with a practical checklist for identifying gaps in client data flows, vendor contracts, privacy policies, and consumer-facing opt-out mechanisms before enforcement letters arrive.

BREAK | 1:00pm – 1:10pm

SESSION 2 – Complying with New York’s Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act After the Instacart Demand | 1:10pm – 2:10pm

This session covers New York’s Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act (N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 349-a), the Attorney General’s January 2026 demand letter to Instacart, and the practical compliance obligations that follow from both. Attorneys will learn how to identify which pricing mechanisms trigger the statute’s disclosure requirements, how the AG has interpreted ‘clear and conspicuous’ disclosure at every consumer-facing touchpoint, and how platform liability extends to third-party partners using marketplace pricing tools. The session also surveys the rapidly expanding multi-state legislative landscape so practitioners can build scalable compliance frameworks rather than state-by-state point solutions.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Colorado

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

District of Columbia

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Delaware

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Florida

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 General Hours

Receive CLE credit in Florida via attorney submission.
Georgia

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Iowa

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Idaho

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Illinois

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Indiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Kansas

Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive

Kentucky

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Louisiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Massachusetts

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maryland

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maine

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Michigan

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Minnesota

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Montana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
Nebraska

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

myLawCLE reports attendance to Nebraska on each attorney’s behalf for all programs. Please do not self-report.
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Nevada

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Oklahoma

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

Oregon

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Rhode Island

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

South Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

South Dakota

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Tennessee

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Utah

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Virginia

Not Eligible
2 General Hours

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Washington

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 Law & Legal Hours

Receive CLE credit in Washington via attorney submission.
Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

West Virginia

Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General

Wyoming

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars
iPad for Lawyers: The Complete Mobile Practice Toolkit
iPad for Lawyers: The Complete Mobile Practice Toolkit Wed, August 26, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay
When AI Notetakers Break Privilege in Internal Investigations
When AI Notetakers Break Privilege in Internal Investigations Fri, August 28, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay