In re Anthem, Inc. Data Breach Litigation

Track this case

Case overview

Case Number:

5:15-md-02617

Court:

California Northern

Nature of Suit:

Contract: Other

Multi Party Litigation:

Class Action, Multi-district Litigation

Judge:

Lucy H. Koh

Firms

Companies

Sectors & Industries:

  1. August 16, 2018

    $115M Anthem Data Breach Deal Gets Final Nod

    A California federal judge on Thursday gave final approval to a $115 million deal that ends claims Anthem Inc. put 79 million consumers' personal information at risk in a 2015 data breach, casting aside calls for the settlement to go even further to punish the nation's second-largest health insurer.

  2. June 14, 2018

    Anthem Breach Attys' $38M Fee Ask 'Overreach,' Judge Says

    U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh on Thursday put the screws to attorneys requesting $37.9 million in fees for work done on the Anthem Inc. data breach litigation, saying they "overreached" and asking why 26 law firms representing the named plaintiffs needed to subcontract work to another 27 firms.

  3. April 25, 2018

    Anthem Breach Attys' $38M Fee Ask Too High, Report Says

    A special master on Tuesday recommended knocking 25 percent off the $37.95 million in fees requested by 53 law firms in the Anthem Inc. data breach litigation, saying the contract attorney rates were too high and there was duplicated work between the firms.

  4. February 08, 2018

    Special Master Tapped For $38M Anthem Atty Fee Fight

    A former California judge was tapped as a special master Thursday to scrutinize $37.95 million in fees requested by 53 law firms in the Anthem Inc. data breach litigation, following worries that the many billers and their requested rates signal waste and padding.

  5. January 02, 2018

    Class Members Rip Proposed $115M Anthem Data Breach Deal

    Several members of a class of consumers who struck a proposed $115 million deal with Anthem Inc. to settle claims related to a massive 2015 data breach on Friday urged a California federal judge to reject the deal, arguing that it is redundant for consumers who already have credit monitoring protection and unfairly punishes those who instead opt for cash.

  6. August 25, 2017

    Anthem's Record $115M Data Breach Deal Gets First Nod

    U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh on Friday granted preliminary approval to a $115 million deal ending litigation over Anthem Inc.'s massive 2015 data breach, advancing what's being hailed as the largest-ever data breach settlement, which would provide credit protection and reimbursement for customers and up to $38 million in attorneys' fees.

  7. June 23, 2017

    Anthem Inks Record $115M Deal Over Massive Data Breach

    Anthem Inc. has agreed to a deal valued at $115 million to end litigation over a massive 2015 data breach, creating a pool of funds to provide credit protection and reimbursement for customers and up to $38 million in attorneys' fees in the largest-ever data breach settlement, class attorneys said Friday.

  8. April 06, 2017

    Anthem Likens Data Breach To Election Hack In Venue Fight

    An Anthem subsidiary fought back against an attempt to send a suit over the insurer's massive data breach back to state court, saying Wednesday that the dispute belongs in California federal court because it implicates national security much like a hypothetical election-hacking case would.

  9. January 26, 2017

    Several Plaintiffs Exit MDL Over Anthem Data Breach

    A California federal judge on Wednesday trimmed several plaintiffs who wanted out of litigation over Anthem's 2015 data breach, including one individual who asked to toss his claims because he felt the company's request that he allow his computer's files and data to be replicated was too invasive.

  10. January 18, 2017

    Anthem Customer Asks To Nix Claims After 'Invasive' Data Bid

    A named plaintiff in litigation over Anthem's 2015 data breach asked a California federal judge to toss his claims Tuesday, saying a request that he allow the replication of his computer's files and data is too invasive, considering that entrusting the company with his personal information previously led to him suffering identity theft.