Favorite Sport

Favorite Sport

Ping Pong

Favorite Game Video Game

Favorite Game

Rock Band

Cups of Coffee

Cups of Coffee


How I Get Around


Quick Facts

Law School

Chicago-Kent College of Law

Perfect Vacation


Why Edelson?

I get to wear jeans and slippers at the office.

Curriculum Vitae

RYAN D. ANDREWS is a Partner at Edelson PC where he leads the firm’s Issues & Appeals Group. The Issues and Appeals Group routinely litigates issues of first impression nationwide securing pathmarking victories in several federal appellate courts and the United States Supreme Court. These decisions have benefited consumers in numerous areas—including common law privacy and nearly all of its statutory variants—fundamentally changing how entire industries operate. The Issues and Appeals Group also assists in crafting the firms class settlements and correcting abuses in the class action bar from profiteering objectors and abusive settlements.

  • Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016). In Spokeo, the Court rejected the argument that individuals must allege “real world” harm to have standing to sue in federal court; instead, the Court recognized that “intangible” harms and even the “risk of future harm” can establish standing. Commentators have called Spokeo one of the most important consumer privacy cases to come before the Supreme Court in recent times. On remand, the Ninth Circuit again confirmed that Robins had standing to pursue his claim. Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., 867 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2017).
  • Patel v. Facebook, Inc., 932 F.3d 1264 (9th Cir. 2019), cert. denied 140 S. Ct. 937 (2020). Secured affirmance of order certifying class and challenging Article III standing in the first case brought under the Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act. The victory paved the way for the class’s $650 million settlement—the largest ever in a consumer privacy case.
  • Kater v. Churchill Downs Inc., 886 F.3d 784 (9th Cir. 2018). In a question of first impression, the Court reversed the dismissal of Kater’s claims and held that a mobile app casino game was illegal gambling under a state loss recovery statute.
  • Birchmeier v. Caribbean Cruise Line, Inc. 896 F.3d 792 (7th Cir. 2018), cert. denied sub nom McCabe v. Aranda, 139 S. Ct. 923 (2019). Secured affirmance of approval of largest Telephone Consumer Protection Act settlement on record ($76 million) and associated fee award.
  • Clark v. Gannett Co., Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 172041. Secured affirmance of approval of class settlement and reversal of order limiting the scope of testimony of professional objector’s prior extortion attempts in sanctions evidentiary hearing.
  • Edelson PC v. The Bandas Law Firm, PC, No. 1:16-CV-11057, 2019 WL 272812 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 17, 2019). Secured permanent injunction against professional objector preventing further unauthorized practice of law and extortionate settlements of class action objections.
  • Wilson v. Huuuge, Inc., 944 F.3d 1212 (9th Cir. 2019). In case of first impression, the Court found that downloading and using an app did not provide constructive notice of an arbitration clause buried in the terms of use affirming the denial of a motion to compel arbitration.
  • Beaton v. SpeedyPC Software, 907 F.3d 1018 (7th Cir. 2018), cert. denied 139 S. Ct. 1465 (2019). Secured order affirming certification of a nationwide class of consumers on a Rule 23(f) appeal in a case alleging the sale of software that falsely claimed to improve computer performance.
  • Klaudia Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 180175. Secured reversal of dismissal of class action alleging violations of the Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act and convinced the Court to part ways with its sister-court’s analysis. The Court held that BIPA does not require an additional harm other than the violation of the right to privacy created by the Illinois legislature.
  • Yershov v. Gannett Satellite Info. Network, Inc., 820 F. 3d 482 (1st Cir. 2016). In a landmark decision, the Court (including retired Justice David Souter) reversed the dismissal of Video Privacy Protection Act claims finding that mobile app users are “subscribers” and unique device IDs can be “personally identifiable information.”
  • Resnick v. AvMed, Inc., 693 F. 3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2012). In a medical data breach class action, the Court reversed dismissal and adopted plaintiff’s novel “overpayment” theory of damages.
  • William S. Consovoy & Ryan D. Andrews, “High Court Gets it Right with ‘Spokeo’ Decision,” National Law Journal (May 30, 2016).
  • Jay Edelson & Ryan D. Andrews, “Pick-Offs After Campbell-Ewald: Some Predictions,” Law360, January 21, 2016.
  • Panelist for IAPP webinar “VPPA Class Actions—the Current State of Play” (November 19, 2015).
  • Adjunct Professor of Law, Chicago-Kent College of Law. Taught a third-year seminar on class actions.
  • Ryan is a regular judge at law school moot court competitions in Chicago.
  • Order of the Coif
  • Super Lawyers Rising Star, 2014-2019
  • Super Lawyer, 2020-2022
  • Law Bulletin’s Emerging Lawyers, 2015-2021
  • Benchmark Plaintiff Litigation Star, 2014
  • Ryan externed for the Honorable Joan B. Gottschall in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
  • Ryan was a Notes & Comments Editor for The Chicago-Kent Law Review, and was a teaching assistant for both Property Law and Legal Writing courses.
  • State of Illinois
  • United States Supreme Court
  • United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
  • United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois