In re Cupertino Electric Inc. Litigation
- Beth Freeman
- 5:23-cv-04007
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In re Cupertino Electric Inc. Litigation: Judge Freeman consolidated two data-breach class actions involving Cupertino Electric for all purposes.
The plaintiffs and proposed class members in the Crowl and Wise data-breach lawsuits, Cupertino Electric, Inc., and counsel handling the two cases.
What happened
In In re Cupertino Electric Inc. Litigation, Kevin Crowl and Jay Wise asked the court to combine their separate class actions against Cupertino Electric, Inc. The company did not oppose the request.
Both cases concerned the same June 2023 data breach and alleged that sensitive personal information had been exposed because Cupertino Electric failed to protect it adequately. The cases involved similar nationwide classes and overlapping claims, including negligence, implied-contract violations, unjust enrichment, and requests for court-ordered relief.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman granted the motion and consolidated the cases for all purposes. The court directed future filings to be made in Crowl’s case, administratively closed Wise’s case, and ordered counsel to propose a schedule for filing one consolidated complaint.
The detailed version
- In re Cupertino Electric Inc. Litigation · No. 5:23-cv-04007
- Beth Freeman
- Dec. 6, 2023
Background
The court considered Plaintiffs Kevin Crowl and Jay Wise’s motion to consolidate two cases against Cupertino Electric, Inc.: Case No. 23-cv-04007-BLF and Case No. 23-cv-04232-BLF. Cupertino Electric did not oppose the motion. The court also vacated the hearing scheduled for March 28, 2024, because it found the motion appropriate for decision without oral argument.
Both lawsuits asserted class claims arising from a data breach that Cupertino Electric discovered on June 24, 2023. Crowl and Wise alleged that the breach compromised class members’ sensitive personally identifiable information and that Cupertino Electric had failed to protect that information adequately. Each case proposed a nationwide class consisting of people whose information was exposed or compromised in the breach.
The cases asserted substantially similar claims for negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and declaratory and injunctive relief. Crowl also asserted a claim under California’s Unfair Competition Law. Wise also asserted claims for breach of confidence and breach of fiduciary duty.
Legal standard
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a)(2) permits a court to consolidate cases that involve a common question of law or fact. The court explained that it should weigh the convenience of consolidation against possible delay, confusion, or prejudice.
Court’s reasoning
The court found that the two cases involved the same subject matter and alleged wrongful conduct, defined substantially similar classes, and presented substantially similar claims. As a result, the same discovery and class-certification issues would be relevant to both actions. The court concluded that consolidation would conserve judicial resources and reduce the time and cost of trying the cases separately.
Disposition
Judge Beth Labson Freeman GRANTED the motion to consolidate. The court ordered that the Crowl and Wise actions be CONSOLIDATED for all purposes under the caption In re Cupertino Electric Inc. Litigation. Future filings were to be made in Case No. 23-cv-04007-BLF, and the Clerk was ordered to administratively close Case No. 23-cv-04232-BLF. Counsel for Crowl and Wise were ordered to propose a schedule for filing a consolidated complaint within 10 days of the order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.