JPMorgan Chase · Governance finding · severity 1 of 5
A caller filed a proposed class action on 6 October 2022 in the Northern District of California against JPMorgan Chase, Microsoft and Nuance Communications, alleging that Nuance's voice-biometric software recorded Chase customer-service calls, created callers' voiceprints and enrolled them in a database without consent, in breach of California's Invasion of Privacy Act. JPMorgan was dropped when the complaint was amended in January 2023; the case continued against Nuance, survived a motion to dismiss in part in May 2024, and was dismissed without prejudice by stipulation in April 2025. A separate 2024 Illinois biometric-privacy (BIPA) suit against JPMorgan was stayed in September 2025 pending Cisneros v. Nuance, a voice-ID appeal the Seventh Circuit decided for Nuance in August 2026. No court has found that Chase or Nuance broke the law.
Record last reviewed Oct 21, 2026 · Markdown
Date
Institution
Country
United States
AI system
Gatekeeper · Voice-biometric caller authentication and fraud scoring; Nuance markets it as an "AI Risk Engine" using deep neural networks, per the complaint · vendor: Nuance Communications (Microsoft)
AI?
Machine-learning system (inferred from the record)
The sources describe a machine-learning model; nobody on the record labelled it AI.
Category
Status
Court filing
Severity
1 of 5
Impact
Proposed classes of Chase callers in California; the number of callers affected was not established. · Allegations only. No damages awarded or settlement announced, no court finding against JPMorgan or Nuance, and no regulatory action reported.
What happened?
The original complaint, filed on 6 October 2022, named JPMorgan Chase & Co., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Microsoft and Nuance as defendants. In December 2022 the parties stipulated that the plaintiff would amend her complaint after defense counsel raised intended motions to compel arbitration; the first amended complaint, filed on 9 January 2023, was directed against Microsoft and Nuance only.[1][2]
According to the court's summary of the consolidated complaint, Nuance's Gatekeeper product "records a consumer's voice, creates a biometric voice print of the caller" and compares later callers against stored voiceprints; the plaintiffs said Nuance markets it as an "AI Risk Engine" using deep neural networks. The named plaintiffs alleged that their calls to Chase's customer-support centres were recorded by Nuance's technology, that voiceprints were created and automatically enrolled in Nuance's database, and that neither Nuance nor Chase disclosed this or obtained consent.[3]
On 28 May 2024 Chief Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu denied Nuance's motion to dismiss the wiretapping and eavesdropping claims under California Penal Code sections 631 and 632, holding that analysing "what they say" is content rather than mere call characteristics, and dismissed the voiceprint claim under section 637.3 with leave to amend. The plaintiffs filed a stipulated dismissal without prejudice on 9 April 2025, before any class was certified.[1][3]
Separately, a proposed class action against JPMorgan Chase & Co. under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, removed to the Northern District of Illinois in July 2024 (No. 1:24-cv-06560), turned on BIPA's exemption for financial institutions. On 2 September 2025 the court stayed it pending the Seventh Circuit's decision in Cisneros v. Nuance Communications. That appeal concerned Nuance's voice-ID service for Charles Schwab, and on 28 August 2026 the Seventh Circuit held that Nuance shares the exemption when it authenticates a financial institution's customers. On 16 October 2026 the docket recorded a new filing classed as a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; its text is not in the public archive. The stay order does not describe the biometric data at issue in the JPMorgan case.[4][5][6]
When did it happen?
- Oct 6, 2022
Proposed CIPA class action filed against JPMorgan Chase, Microsoft and Nuance in the Northern District of California (No. 4:22-cv-05827).[1]
- Jan 9, 2023
First amended complaint names only Microsoft and Nuance; JPMorgan is no longer a defendant.[1]
- May 28, 2024
Court denies Nuance's motion to dismiss the section 631 and 632 claims and dismisses the voiceprint claim with leave to amend.[3]
- Apr 9, 2025
California plaintiffs file a stipulated dismissal without prejudice.[1]
- Sep 2, 2025
Illinois BIPA suit against JPMorgan Chase & Co. stayed pending Cisneros v. Nuance.[4]
- Aug 28, 2026
Seventh Circuit rules that Nuance falls within BIPA's financial-institution exemption when authenticating Schwab customers.[6]
- Oct 16, 2026
A new filing classed as a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is docketed in the Illinois suit.[5]
What was the impact?
- Customers: Proposed classes of Chase callers in California; the number of callers affected was not established.[1][3][4]
- Other: Allegations only. No damages awarded or settlement announced, no court finding against JPMorgan or Nuance, and no regulatory action reported.[1][3][4]
Severity 1 of 5: Privacy allegations only, with no finding, loss or regulatory action: JPMorgan was dropped from the California case within three months, that case was later dismissed without prejudice, and the Illinois suit against JPMorgan has been stayed or awaiting a ruling on dismissal.
How did JPMorgan Chase respond?
No public statement by JPMorgan Chase or Nuance found as of 2026-10-21 (searched news coverage and the CourtListener dockets). In court, JPMorgan's lawyers signalled motions to compel arbitration before it was dropped from the California case, and JPMorgan moved to dismiss the Illinois suit in 2024 on the financial-institution exemption; Nuance argued in California that its software only analyses the characteristics of calls, not their content.[2][3][5]
What was the outcome, and did regulators act?
The California case ended without a ruling against anyone: JPMorgan left it in January 2023 and the plaintiffs dismissed their claims against Nuance without prejudice in April 2025. The Illinois BIPA case against JPMorgan is pending; a dismissal motion was docketed on 16 October 2026, after the Seventh Circuit's August 2026 Cisneros ruling. No regulator has acted.[1][5][6]
Did JPMorgan Chase settle the Nuance voiceprint lawsuit?
No settlement has been reported. JPMorgan was named in the original October 2022 complaint but was dropped when the plaintiff amended it in January 2023, after defense counsel raised arbitration. The case then proceeded against Nuance alone and was dismissed without prejudice by stipulation in April 2025.
Was Chase's voice authentication system AI?
The record describes a machine-learning system. According to the complaint as summarised by the court, Nuance markets its Gatekeeper voice-biometric product as an AI Risk Engine that uses deep neural networks to create and compare callers' voiceprints. JPMorgan has not described the system publicly in these cases.
Does Illinois' biometric privacy law apply to banks' voice ID?
BIPA exempts financial institutions subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. In August 2026 the Seventh Circuit held that the exemption also covers Nuance when it authenticates a financial institution's customers, which is why the Illinois suit against JPMorgan was stayed to await that ruling and is now back before the court on a dismissal motion.
- Turner v. Microsoft Corporation, No. 4:22-cv-05827 (N.D. Cal.), docket court
- Stipulation to Amend Complaint and Order (as modified), Turner v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. et al. (Dkt. 18) court
- Order on Nuance's motion to dismiss, Turner v. Nuance Communications, Inc. (Dkt. 67) court
- Brown v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., No. 24-cv-6560 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 2, 2025), order staying case court
- Brown v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., No. 1:24-cv-06560 (N.D. Ill.), docket court
- Cisneros v. Nuance Communications, Inc., No. 24-2982 (7th Cir. Aug. 28, 2026) court
When AI goes wrong at a bank, the next morning's brief says so.
when one of these regulators moves, the next morning's brief says so · six sourced stories · 7 am PT · free
plus every regulation, bank and agent page update, the morning after · leave any morning