Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
CommunitySub-MenuPublishersChannelsProductsSub-MenuBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAboutContactResourcesSubscribeSupport
Join
Search
Close

Motion for Preliminary Approval of Accellion Data Breach Settlement Filed in California Federal Court

By Kristin Bryan on June 16, 2022
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
pexels-photo-1152359

This week Plaintiffs in thirteen consolidated cases brought against Accellion and other defendants filed a motion for preliminary approval of a class action settlement in California federal court.  This development is notable for its resolution (if approved) only as to Accellion and for the categories of relief offered to class members.  In re Accellion, Inc. Data Breach Litigation, Case No. 21-cv-01155-EJD (E.D. Cal.).

First, some background.  In December 2020, Defendant Accellion notified its customers that it had experienced a data event.  According to filings in the litigation, cybercriminals targeted vulnerabilities in Accellion’s legacy file transfer (“FTA”) product during December 2020-January 2021.  The incident affected a number of public and private sector entities.  Litigation, including a number of California Consumer Privacy Act class action lawsuits, followed.

In these cases Plaintiffs alleged that Accellion: (a) failed to implement and maintain adequate data security practices to safeguard Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ Personal Information; (b) failed to prevent the data event; (c) failed to detect security vulnerabilities leading to the data event; and (d) failed to disclose that their data security practices were inadequate to safeguard Class Members’ Personal Information.

Besides invoking the CCPA, Plaintiffs also asserted claims against Accellion for negligence, negligence per se, invasion of privacy (intrusion upon seclusion), violations of various consumer protection statutes (including the North Carolina Unfair Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the Washington Consumer Protection Act, , the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Action (“CMIA”), the California Customer Records Act (“CCRA”), and the California Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”)), and for declaratory and injunctive relief.

In March 2022, thirteen of these cases were consolidated in the Northern District of California under the caption In re Accellion, Inc. Data Breach Litigation, Case No. 21-cv-01155-EJD before Judge Davila.

Based upon the underlying facts alleged by Plaintiffs, the cases involved interesting questions concerning the potential liability of Accellion’s customers regarding the data event as a result of prior disclaimers made by Accellion and how its FTA software operated.  This is because, as explained in prior court filings:

Accellion did not guarantee the security of the FTA software to customers.  Its standard license agreement disclaimed such guarantees and included a broad limitation of liability for any damages resulting from a data breach.  The license agreement explicitly states that each FTA Customer is “solely responsible and liable for the use of and access to” the FTA software “and for all files and data transmitted, shared, or stored using” FTA.  With the FTA, customers have exclusive control over the data they are storing or transferring via FTA . . . Accellion never had access to the contents of the customers’ files.

These issues will likely remain unaddressed, however.  This week, Plaintiffs in the cases filed a motion for preliminary approval of a class action settlement that would resolve all of the class’s claims against Accellion  (not the other defendants).  The settlement class, comprised of about 9.2 million individuals, would include “all natural persons who are residents of the United States whose Personal Information was stored on the FTA systems of Accellion’s FTA Customers and was compromised in the [data event].”

As outlined in materials filed with the court, the Settlement establishes a non-reversionary cash fund of $8.1 million to pay for valid claims, notice and administration costs, any Service Awards to the named Plaintiffs, and any Fee Award and Costs awarded by the Court  Under the terms of the Settlement, Claimants may elect to receive one of the following:

(1) two years of three-bureau credit monitoring;

(2) reimbursement of Documented Losses(up to a capped amount); or

(3) a cash payment, calculated in accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement, estimated at $15 to $50 (at 1% and 3% claims rates respectively).

The Settlement also provides for injunctive relief to be implemented for four years from the Effective Date of the Settlement, including requiring Accellion to fully retire its FTA offering, provide annual cybersecurity training to all employees, employ personnel with formal responsibilities for cybersecurity, and take other measures.

A hearing on the motion for preliminary approval has been scheduled for December 8, 2022, with additional briefing by the parties due over the summer.  For more on this, and other developments in the realm of data privacy, security and innovation stay tuned.  CPW will be there to keep you in the loop.

Photo of Kristin Bryan Kristin Bryan

Kristin Bryan is a data privacy and cybersecurity litigator experienced in the resolution of complex disputes.

Kristin has deep expertise defending clients in federal class action and multidistrict litigations concerning allegations that their practices violated federal and state privacy laws. This includes in…

Kristin Bryan is a data privacy and cybersecurity litigator experienced in the resolution of complex disputes.

Kristin has deep expertise defending clients in federal class action and multidistrict litigations concerning allegations that their practices violated federal and state privacy laws. This includes in the context of data breach and incident response litigation. As a natural extension of her experience litigating data privacy disputes, Kristin also provides practical, business-oriented privacy advice to a wide range of clients and has represented them in government investigations regarding their privacy practices.

Kristin is CIPP/US certified and routinely publishes and speaks on cutting-edge developments in data privacy and cybersecurity litigation. Kristin is currently the co-chair of the International Association of Privacy Professional (IAPP)’s KnowledgeNet Chapter for Cleveland and on the IAPP’s Privacy Bar Advisory Board. She is a 2020-21 Vice Chair of the ABA TIPS Cybersecurity and Data Privacy Committee and managing editor of Squire Patton Boggs’ data privacy blog Consumer Privacy World.

Prior to joining the firm, Kristin worked at an international law firm in New York, specializing in Data Strategy & Security.

View full website bio.

Read more about Kristin BryanEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Privacy & Data Security
  • Blog:
    Consumer Privacy World
  • Organization:
    Squire Patton Boggs
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center

New to the Network

  • Pro Policyholder
  • The Way on FDA
  • Crypto Digest
  • Inside Cybersecurity & Privacy Law
  • La Oficina Legal Ayala Hernández
Copyright © 2022, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo