DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Who Has Standing in a Data Breach Litigation? In The Third Circuit, Fear of Speculative Future Harm Still Doesn’t Cut It

Posted on March 2, 2021 by Dissent

Aaron Garavaglia and Kristin Bryan of Squire Patton Boggs write:

As the number of data breaches continue to rise, so too will the number of lawsuits filed.  As CPW previously reported, the number of data breaches in 2020 was more than double that of 2019.  One can only wonder what 2021 will bring.  Yet with this increase in data breach litigation, a recent opinion within the Third Circuit reminds us of the crucial issue of standing, which is often challenged at the onset of a lawsuit.  In a data breach, when (if ever) does a plaintiff suffer an actual injury?  Is the disclosure of certain categories of information in a breach, such as Social Security numbers, by itself enough, or must (as the majority of courts have held) a plaintiff allege that she was actually the victim of identity theft and fraudulent charges were placed on her accounts?  Clemens v. Execupharm, Inc., No. 20-cv-3383, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35178 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 25, 2021) reminds us that the Third Circuit at least requires more than theft or disclosure of personal information for a plaintiff to have standing in a data breach litigation.

Read more on Consumer Privacy World.

Category: Commentaries and Analyses

Post navigation

← Crypto firm Tether says it won’t pay $24 million ransom after being threatened with document leak
Chinese cyber attack foiled: Power Ministry →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Ransomware Attack on ADP Partner Exposes Broadcom Employee Data
  • Anne Arundel ransomware attack compromised confidential health data, county says
  • Australian national known as “DR32” sentenced in U.S. federal court
  • Alabama Man Sentenced to 14 Months in Connection with Securities and Exchange Commission X Hack that Spiked Bitcoin Prices
  • Japan enacts new Active Cyberdefense Law allowing for offensive cyber operations
  • Breachforums Boss “Pompompurin” to Pay $700k in Healthcare Breach
  • HHS Office for Civil Rights Settles HIPAA Cybersecurity Investigation with Vision Upright MRI
  • Additional 12 Defendants Charged in RICO Conspiracy for over $263 Million Cryptocurrency Thefts, Money Laundering, Home Break-Ins
  • RIBridges firewall worked. But forensic report says hundreds of alarms went unnoticed by Deloitte.
  • Chinese Hackers Hit Drone Sector in Supply Chain Attacks

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Massachusetts Senate Committee Approves Robust Comprehensive Privacy Law
  • Montana Becomes First State to Close the Law Enforcement Data Broker Loophole
  • Privacy enforcement under Andrew Ferguson’s FTC
  • “We would be less confidential than Google” – Proton threatens to quit Switzerland over new surveillance law
  • CFPB Quietly Kills Rule to Shield Americans From Data Brokers
  • South Korea fines Temu for data protection violations
  • The BR Privacy & Security Download: May 2025

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.