Client Alert: Serial CIPA Plaintiff Vivek Shah Declared Vexatious Litigant By Central District of California

On July 20, 2026, the Central District of California finally declared pro se plaintiff Vivek Shah—who has filed at least 29 lawsuits since 2021, including numerous CIPA claims—a vexatious litigant. Shah is now required to obtain court approval before filing any new CIPA or related digital-privacy suit in that district. The court found that Shah's record of seeking out violations and submitting enough search queries against target websites to hit the amount-in-controversy threshold needed for federal jurisdiction, voluntarily dismissing his cases upon challenges, and never once litigating a claim to the merits, strongly indicated his purpose was to harass defendants into coercive settlements rather than seek redress in good faith.

What it means: The order is narrow and applies only to new federal filings by Shah in the Central District of California alleging claims under CIPA or related digital-privacy claims. It doesn't stop him from filing the same type of claims in California state court, in other federal districts, or in arbitration, and it doesn't touch his currently pending cases. However, California state courts are increasingly finding that CIPA pen register claims do not apply to modern website tracking tools, and not all companies have an arbitration agreement allowing for the dispute to proceed outside of the courts.

Nevertheless, this is a useful data point for any company Shah targets going forward, wherever he decides to file. A defendant can point to this ruling—and the judicial findings behind it—to challenge his credibility and motive, even in courts where the order itself has no formal effect.  Combined with the state-court trend on pen-register theories, these developments raise the practical cost of Shah's litigation strategy in court and make arbitration a comparatively more attractive venue for him—so companies should expect continued or increased arbitration demands from him if they have an applicable arbitration provision.