Rosa

Rosa v. Brightline, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 18, 20233:23-cv-02132California1,345 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 No. C 23-02132 WHA In re No. C 23-02291 WHA No. C 23-02503 WHA DATA BREACH SECURITY No. C 23-02909 WHA

LITIGATION AGAINST

BRIGHTLINE, INC. (Consolidated)

ORDER RE MOTIONS FOR

APPOINTMENT AS INTERIM

CLASS COUNSEL

16 This putative class action currently consists of four consolidated actions regarding the same alleged data breach involving defendant Brightline, Inc., which is a telehealth provider focused on pediatric behavioral health. All four different plaintiffs’ counsel in those actions jointly moved for consolidation, and defendant did not oppose (Dkt. No. 25). A prior order found consolidation appropriate since there were overlapping issues of fact and law (Dkt. No. 26). Counsel in the consolidated action have now filed three different motions to be appointed interim class counsel under Rule 23(g). Defendant neither endorses nor opposes the motions. …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.