In Re Anne Arundel Data Breach Litigation

Key Facts

Issues

• The Court denied the request to appoint an executive committee because plaintiffs did not demonstrate necessity, as the cases involve nearly identical claims from one data breach without different interests requiring separate representation.
• The Court considered whether to consolidate twenty-one class actions filed against Anne Arundel Dermatology, P.A. arising from the same data breach, finding that consolidation serves Rule 42(a) purposes with low risk of prejudice and confusion.
• The Court evaluated Rule 23(g) factors including counsel experience, work done, and resources, and appointed Gary Klinger, Tyler Bean as interim co-lead counsel, and Gary E. Mason as liaison counsel to represent the proposed class.

Holdings

Remedies

• The Court granted the request to consolidate all related class actions into a single action. Twenty-one class actions filed against Anne Arundel Dermatology, P.A. were consolidated, all filings must be made in the lead case 1:25-cv-02274-GLR, and the consolidated action is captioned In re Anne Arundel Data Breach Litigation.
• The Court appointed Gary Klinger of Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman, PLLC and Tyler Bean of Siri & Glimstad, LLP as interim co-lead class counsel. Gary E. Mason of Mason LLP was appointed as interim liaison class counsel.
• The Court appointed Gary E. Mason of Mason LLP as interim liaison class counsel.
• The Court ordered that Plaintiffs shall file an amended, consolidated Complaint within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order.

Legal Principles

• Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g)(3) allows courts to designate interim counsel to act on behalf of a putative class before determining whether to certify the action as a class action. Courts consider factors including: work done identifying/investigating claims, experience handling class actions and complex litigation, knowledge of applicable law, and resources committed to representing the class.
• Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) allows courts to consolidate cases if they involve common questions of law or fact. The Court has broad discretion in determining whether to consolidate cases and considers factors including risks of prejudice, confusion, inconsistent adjudications, burden on parties and judicial resources, length of time required, and relative expense.

Precedent Name

• Mikell v. Tycon Med. Sys., Inc.
• In re Gerber Prods. Co. Heavy Metals Baby Food Litig.
• Arnold v. E. Air Lines, Inc.
• Gordon v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.
• A/S J. Ludwig Mowinckles Rederi v. Tidewater Const. Co.
• In re 5-Hour Energy Mktg. v. Innovation Ventures, LLC
• Darrin v. Huntington Ingalls Indus.

Cited Statute

• Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g)(1)
• Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a)
• Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g)(3)

Judge Name

Passage Text

• The Court finds that all four Rule 23(g) factors support appointing proposed interim co-lead counsel and liaison counsel. The counsel investigated potential claims after the breach announcement, have extensive experience with data breach class actions including Klinger with 100+ privacy violations cases, and have substantial resources without accepting third-party litigation funding.
• The Court finds that combining the cases serves the purposes of Rule 42(a) and will consolidate all related class actions into a single action because the actions share common questions of law and fact as they all arise out the same Data Breach that affected Anne Arundel Dermatology, P.A.
• The Court denies the request to appoint an executive committee because this action arises from one data breach with nearly identical common law claims. Plaintiffs allege the same or substantially similar harm and do not allege different interests requiring separate representation, and Correa has not specified any roles or tasks warranting the committee.

Damages / Relief Type

• Declaratory relief was sought by Plaintiff for the class
• Injunctive relief was sought by Plaintiff for the class
• Damages, attorneys' fees and costs were sought by Plaintiff for the class