Unreasonable?

https://pogowasright.org/privacy-s-d-cal-employee-did-not-waive-privacy-right-in-personal-email-data-on-company-provided-laptop-dec-5-2025/

PRIVACY—S.D. Cal.: Employee did not waive privacy right in personal email data on company provided laptop, (Dec 5, 2025)

Kathleen Kapusta, J.D. writes:

The company’s request to review data spanning more than 15 years, nearly 10 times the length of her employment with the company, was “patently unreasonable and overbroad.”

A former analyst for a security operations provider who added her personal email account to her employer provided laptop did not waive her constitutional right to privacy in her personal email data, a federal district court in California ruled, granting in part her motion for a protective order. While the company has a legitimate interest in obtaining relevant discovery in the employee’s lawsuit alleging race discrimination, retaliation, and wrongful discharge, its request for an unrestricted review of the data is “profoundly serious in its scope and potential impact,” the court stated, noting that there are less intrusive methods for obtaining the relevant information (Lim v. Expel, Inc., No. 3:24-cv-02284-W-AHG (S.D. Cal. Dec. 1, 2025)).

Personal email account. The employee worked as a Senior Governance Risk Compliance and Privacy Analyst for Expel, Inc., for approximately 18 months. During that time, she added her personal Gmail account to the mail account on her work issued laptop. Company policy allowed employees to use company property “for incidental personal reasons” with certain restrictions.

The employee believed her personal email account was “password-protected and separate from any work platform.” Her personal email data spanned more than 15 years and included sensitive, private information such as attorney-client communications, medical and financial records, and home security images including images of her minor children.

When the company terminated the employee, it revoked her access to her laptop. It also denied her request to retrieve personal files, telling her that her laptop would be “wiped.” According to the company’s general counsel, it was standard practice to wipe a laptop for reuse but because the employee had made allegations of retaliation, Expel retained her laptop.

Read more at VitalLaw.