December 2016 Update
In the smart meter-related case of Naperville Smart Meter Awareness (NSMA) v. City of Naperville, the Federal district court entered a final judgment against NSMA and in favor of the City on September 26, 2016. (Case 1:11-cv-09299)
For a complete article describing an appeal, please refer to https://smartgridawareness.org/2016/12/24/naperville-group-appeals-smart-meter-ruling-to-higher-court/; and
Some of the key documents for the closed case of 1:11-cv-09299 may be found at the following link: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-ilnd-1_11-cv-09299/content-detail.html
Federal Lawsuit Updates: City of Naperville v. NSMA (Updated, August 2018)
Since 2011, and in the case of Naperville Smart Meter Awareness (NSMA) v. City of Naperville (Case 1:11-cv-09299), NSMA has been attempting to receive injunctive relief from the mandatory (forced) installation of digital electric smart meters that collect granular energy usage data well in excess of that required for customer billing purposes.
On September 26, 2016, the District Court entered a final judgment in favor of the City of Naperville. NSMA later appealed the District Court ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
In short, NSMA requested the higher court to:
“review of the trial court’s dismissal of its claim that the City of Naperville’s use of smart meters constitutes a violation of NSMA members’ Fourth Amendment rights because the City’s smart meters collect electrical usage data from members’ homes at intervals of every fifteen minutes, which data can then be de-aggregated to offer an invasive view into their personal lives and activities inside their homes.”
This webpage previously provided a summary of many of the case motions and briefs. Most of that information has now been removed, and the reader is currently referred to the latest articles written about the case:
For updated information, please refer to “Federal Court Rules against Consumers on Smart Meters and Privacy Rights,” SkyVision Solutions Blog Article, August 2018, at https://smartgridawareness.org/2018/08/18/federal-court-rules-against-consumers-on-smart-meters/
Also refer to “Smart Meter Data Collection is a ‘Search’, but Court Allows Anyway,” SkyVision Solutions Blog Article, August 2018, at
Naperville Smart Meter Opponent Files Federal Lawsuit
On January 23, 2013, Kim Bendis, at that time President of the NSMA, was arrested by Naperville police officers for both resisting an arrest dealing with the video and audio recording a police officer in the course of his duties (enforcing smart meter installations) and on a charge of “eavesdropping.” The statute for which the police based this arrest had already been declared unconstitutional by state courts at the time of the arrest. On October 1, 2014, Kim Bendis was acquitted of the charge of resisting arrest by a jury trial.
Kim Bendis is now seeking damages from the City of Naperville and penalties for the officers involved in her 2013 arrest. A Federal lawsuit was filed on Friday, January 23, 2015. Here is a link to this new Federal lawsuit: Bendis Federal Lawsuit.
For additional information on this recent story regarding the lawsuit filed by Kim Bendis, refer to: https://smartgridawareness.org/2015/01/29/naperville-smart-meter-opponent-files-federal-lawsuit/
Update added September 16, 2015:
Naperville City Council members this week settled a federal lawsuit filed last winter by a staunch opponent of the city’s smart meter installation program.
The settlement agreement calls for paying $117,500 to Naperville resident Malia “Kim” Bendis, whose Jan. 23 lawsuit accused the city and four of its police officers of violating her constitutional rights.
“She was basically arrested for exactly what I think all of us would believe to be our constitutional right: to protest something she was an active protester about — the smart meters — and then to oversee our government,” Bendis’ lawyer, civil rights attorney Torri Hamilton of Hamilton Law Office in Chicago, said. “What happened to her was completely uncalled for.”
The settlement says it is not to be construed as an admission that the police personnel named in the suit “acted wrongfully” toward Bendis.