AT&T Data Breach Plaintiff Pitches Chicago as Alternate Court Location for MDL
Rah-Nita Boykin, who filed a negligence class action (docket 1:24-cv-02973) against AT&T April 12 in U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois, supports transfer and consolidation of related actions in In re: AT&T Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation to the…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Northern District of Texas in Dallas, said her interested party response (docket 3114) Thursday before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Alternatively, the Country Club Hills, Illinois, resident supports transfer to the Northern District of Illinois in Chicago, the response said. Boykin agrees that the related actions involve one or more common questions of fact, that transferring the cases would serve “the convenience of parties and witnesses,” and that transferring the cases will “promote the just and efficient conduct of such actions,” meeting the criteria of 28 U.S.C. section 1407(a). Each of the related actions concerns “alleged failures” by AT&T resulting in a data breach affecting more than 73 million current and former AT&T customers, the response said. Because the related actions comprise overlapping putative nationwide classes, “no efficiencies will be gained by litigating these claims in multiple forums." Boykin referenced the group of plaintiffs supporting centralization in the Northern District of Georgia, on the basis that the breach largely involves Atlanta-based AT&T Mobility, and cited the carrier's response from Paula Phillips, director-legal administrator of AT&T Services: that “(1) AT&T’s investigation indicates less than 5% of potentially impacted customers are wireless customers; (2) AT&T incident response is based in Dallas; and (3) relevant witnesses for AT&T are located in Dallas.” While some evidence may be located out of the Northern Texas district, the company’s supplemental information “makes clear that much of the evidence subject to discovery will be found at AT&T’s headquarters,” said the response. Chicago federal court would be a “suitable alternative” to the Dallas court because it is also a “convenient and readily accessible location for all counsel and witnesses given its central location and large airports,” the response said. The Northern District of Illinois also has a “faster median time from filing to disposition compared to the Northern District of Texas,” it said. While many AT&T employees and records are located in Dallas, “the distance is easily overcome through the use of Zoom or other telecommunications platforms in today’s modern era of litigation,” said the filing.