Stieve v. Campus

Background

Five plaintiffs—Jamie Stieve, Walter Hall, Tiffany Clark, Virginia Carver, and Cassie Helgeson—each filed a proposed class action against Infinite Campus, Inc. The complaints concern an alleged data breach involving Infinite Campus’s servers that occurred on or around March 18, 2026. The plaintiffs assert substantially similar claims based on the same event and seek to represent the same group of individuals. The order states that the alleged breach affected more than one million individuals, but that figure is presented as an allegation in the complaints.

Infinite Campus did not oppose the motions to consolidate the cases or to appoint interim co-lead counsel. It expressly reserved its rights, remedies, defenses, objections, and arguments, including the right to seek dismissal and to oppose class certification.

Consolidation

The court granted the plaintiffs’ motions to consolidate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42 because the cases share common questions of law and fact. The cases are:

- Hall v. Infinite Campus, Inc., No. 26-cv-2046; - Clark v. Infinite Campus, Inc., No. 26-cv-2051; - Carver v. Infinite Campus, Inc., No. 26-cv-2191; - Helgeson v. Infinite Campus, Inc., No. 26-cv-2306; and - Stieve v. Infinite Campus, Inc., No. 26-cv-2042.

The court designated Stieve as the lead case because it was filed first. All future pleadings, motions, and other documents must be filed in that case. The plaintiffs must file a consolidated amended complaint within 21 days of the order’s date. Once that complaint is filed, the Hall, Clark, Carver, and Helgeson cases will be administratively closed. The consolidation order also applies to later-filed class actions involving similar factual allegations and similar claims concerning the data breach.

Interim Co-Lead Counsel

The court also granted the motions to appoint Bryan L. Bleichner of Chestnut Cambronne PA and David A. Goodwin of Gustafson Gluek PLLC as interim co-lead class counsel. Interim counsel may represent a proposed class before the court decides whether to certify a class. The court found that the proposed counsel and their firms have extensive experience with nationwide consumer class actions and data-breach cases, sufficient resources, and a commitment to work cooperatively and efficiently.

The order assigns interim co-lead counsel responsibility for coordinating the plaintiffs’ lawyers and litigation, delegating work, organizing counsel meetings, presenting the plaintiffs’ positions, serving as the primary contact with Infinite Campus and the court, directing filings, appearing at hearings and conferences, handling communications, conducting discussions and settlement negotiations, selecting experts, promoting efficiency, assessing litigation costs, preparing status reports, and developing procedures for attorneys’ fees and expenses subject to court approval. Any settlement discussions must be conducted by interim co-lead counsel or their designees.

What the Order Did Not Decide

The order addressed case management and counsel appointments. It did not decide whether Infinite Campus is liable, whether the plaintiffs’ claims should be dismissed, whether a class should be certified, or whether the alleged breach caused the asserted injuries.