Postpichal v. Cricket Wireless, LLC

Background

Cricket Wireless produced a spreadsheet on December 23, 2021, containing unredacted addresses and cellphone numbers for Cricket customers whom plaintiffs contended were members of the certified class. The spreadsheet was marked confidential and covered by the parties’ stipulated protective order. Cricket later characterized the production as inadvertent and asked that the information be destroyed. It argued that federal and California privacy laws protected the information from disclosure and that plaintiffs’ counsel had not identified a legitimate need for it.

Court’s analysis

The court found the customer records relevant because plaintiffs’ counsel had been appointed class counsel and was responsible for protecting the certified class’s rights, including challenging Cricket’s efforts to remove individual customers from the class.

The court rejected Cricket’s interpretation of 47 U.S.C. § 222 and California Public Utilities Code § 2891(a)(4). It held that both statutes allow disclosure of the customer information under a court order. The court relied on prior decisions ordering disclosure of similar customer information subject to protective orders.

The court also found that the stipulated protective order sufficiently protected the information. The order limited confidential materials to use in prosecuting, defending, or attempting to settle this litigation. The court noted that Cricket’s concern that class counsel might use the information to solicit customers for individual arbitrations did not justify destruction of the information under the protective order.

Disposition

The court denied Cricket’s request that plaintiffs destroy the customer addresses and cellphone numbers. The opinion also noted that Cricket could raise any issue about the wording of plaintiffs’ proposed notice to excluded class members with Judge Alsup.