412 F.Supp.3d 1363 (Jud.Pan.Mult.Lit. 2019), MDL 2920, In re Stockx Customer Data Security Breach Litigation

Docket Nº:MDL No. 2920
Citation:412 F.Supp.3d 1363
Opinion Judge:KAREN K. CALDWELL, Chair
Party Name:IN RE: STOCKX CUSTOMER DATA SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION
Judge Panel:Before KAREN K. CALDWELL, Chair, ELLEN SEGAL HUVELLE, R. DAVID PROCTOR, CATHERINE D. PERRY, NATHANIEL M. GORTON, MATTHEW F. KENNELLY, DAVID C. NORTON
Case Date:December 18, 2019
Court:United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

Page 1363

412 F.Supp.3d 1363 (Jud.Pan.Mult.Lit. 2019)

IN RE: STOCKX CUSTOMER DATA SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION

MDL No. 2920

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

December 18, 2019

Page 1364

Before KAREN K. CALDWELL, Chair, ELLEN SEGAL HUVELLE, R. DAVID PROCTOR, CATHERINE D. PERRY, NATHANIEL M. GORTON, MATTHEW F. KENNELLY, DAVID C. NORTON

ORDER DENYING TRANSFER

KAREN K. CALDWELL, Chair

Before the Panel:

Defendants StockX LLC and StockX, Inc., move under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to centralize this litigation in the Eastern District of Michigan. This litigation consists of three actions pending in three districts, as listed on Schedule A.[1] Plaintiffs in three actions and a potential tag-along action oppose centralization. Plaintiffs in the Southern District of Florida and the Eastern District of Michigan actions alternatively suggest centralization in the Eastern District of Michigan. The Eastern District of Pennsylvania plaintiff alternatively suggests centralization in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Plaintiff in the Northern District of California Esquer potential tag-along action alternatively supports a Northern District of California transferee district. Plaintiff in the Eastern District of Michigan I.S. potential tag-along action takes no position on centralization, but if ordered, plaintiff suggests Eastern District of Michigan as the transferee district.

On the basis of the papers filed and hearing session held, we conclude that centralization is not necessary for the convenience of the parties and witnesses or to further the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. These putative class actions stem from a data breach of defendants website, which is an online platform to buy and sell like-new merchandise in four different categories: sneakers, watches, handbags and street wear. The breach was disclosed by StockX on August 3 and 9, 2019. Plaintiffs allege that StockX failed to put in place reasonable data security protections, allowing hackers to steal the personal information of 6.8 million customers. There are common factual and legal issues among these cases, but we are not persuaded that Section 1407...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP