Dane Miller has proposed seeking documents and testimony on DraftKings’ algorithms, machine-learning systems, customer-data use, bonuses and VIP programmes in his Illinois lawsuit accusing the sportsbook of encouraging compulsive betting.
A joint initial status report filed Oct. 9 said Miller anticipated discovery into the product’s design, marketing and promotion. The proposed requests cover algorithms; machine-learning specifications; data inputs and outputs; operating procedures; bonus distribution; promotions; VIP and concierge programmes; and software development kits.
Miller proposed obtaining the material through written discovery, depositions, expert discovery and electronically stored information. He proposed completing fact discovery by July 16, 2027, followed by expert discovery by Oct. 22, 2027, and requested a two-week jury trial.
DraftKings Inc. and Casino Queen Inc. opposed moving ahead while their motion to dismiss is pending. Their Oct. 2 motion seeks dismissal with prejudice of all six Illinois-law claims, arguing that an online betting platform and related business practices are services rather than a product covered by Illinois products-liability law.
The defendants also argue that Illinois law does not require a sportsbook to police an adult customer’s betting or protect a player from his own choices. They contend that claims accruing before June 24, 2024 are time-barred under a two-year limitations period.
Miller filed the case in Cook County on July 10, and the defendants removed it to federal court on Aug. 28 on diversity grounds. The matter was assigned to U.S. District Judge Manish S. Shah in the Northern District of Illinois. On Oct. 5, Miller sought reassignment to Judge Robert W. Gettleman, who was overseeing the related Beyer litigation, citing overlapping allegations over addictive design, behavioural analytics, VIP hosts and personalised outreach.
Miller alleges that he opened his DraftKings account in October 2020 and went on to place more than $2 million in bets. His complaint claims the company used customer data to identify people likely to bet frequently and at larger amounts, even though those same behavioural signals could identify heightened addiction risks.
According to the allegations, DraftKings could have used that information to warn customers or help prevent gambling addiction, but instead employed algorithms and promotions to encourage riskier wagering and maximise losses. Miller says he received push notifications, emails and free bets, was given VIP status and assigned agents who encouraged more frequent and riskier bets.
He alleges his betting resulted in the loss of his job, savings and relationship, and led to hospitalisation for suicidal ideation. His claims include strict-liability design defect and failure to warn, negligent design and failure to warn, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and unjust enrichment.
As covered in September, a ProPublica reporter who mimicked high-risk betting behaviour was admitted to DraftKings’ VIP programme after a loss-chasing episode and deposits of $5,800.
Separately, West Virginia bettor Daniel Vest filed a lawsuit in Massachusetts in which DraftKings spokesperson Park Winslow denied that the company uses AI to target customers based on losses or indicators of potential problem gaming. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission said it would examine how DraftKings and other sports-betting companies use AI following reporting about alleged targeting of losing gamblers.
The court has yet to decide the defendants’ dismissal motion or whether discovery will be stayed while it is considered.
