In re PowerSchool Holdings, Inc., and PowerSchool Group, LLC Customer Data Security Breach Litigation

In re PowerSchool Customer Data Breach Litig. · United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · April 18, 2025 · No. MDL No. 3149

Summary

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation grants centralization of actions arising from the PowerSchool customer data security breach. The Panel transfers the actions listed on Schedule A to the Southern District of California and assigns them to Judge Roger T. Benitez for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. The order finds common factual questions concerning the breach, data security practices, and notification of affected individuals.

Court
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
Writing for the Court
Karen K. Caldwell; Nathaniel M. Gorton; Matthew F. Kennelly; David C. Norton; Dale A. Kimball; Madeline Cox Arleo
Jurisdiction
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
Decision date
April 18, 2025
Docket number
MDL No. 3149
Procedural posture
Plaintiffs moved under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to centralize 32 related actions pending in three federal districts, along with related actions identified by the parties, for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.
Precedential value
transfer order with limited precedential value
Parties
Plaintiffs in the Western District of Missouri J.J. action listed on Schedule A v. PowerSchool Holdings, Inc., PowerSchool Group LLC
Disposition
other

Topics

class actionsvenuecivil procedurejoinder

Practice areas

civil proceduremultidistrict litigationdata security litigationclass actions

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the actions involve common questions of fact warranting centralization under 28 U.S.C. § 1407.
  2. Whether centralization in the Southern District of California would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
  3. Whether informal coordination or transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404 would be a more efficient alternative to multidistrict centralization.

Holdings

  1. Centralization was warranted because the actions involved common questions of fact arising from the same cybersecurity incident and presented substantially overlapping claims and discovery issues.
  2. The Southern District of California was an appropriate transferee district for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.
  3. Informal coordination was not shown to be the most efficient method of resolving the litigation, and the absence of assurances that future § 1404 motions would be uncontested weighed against relying on that alternative.

Key quotations

On the basis of the papers filed and the hearing session held, we find that the actions listed on Schedule A involve common questions of fact, and that centralization in the Southern District of California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation. (at 1)
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that actions listed on Schedule A are transferred to the Southern District of California and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Roger T. Benitez for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. (at 3)

Factual background

The actions arise from a cybersecurity incident involving unauthorized access to PowerSchool's Student Information System, which stored personal information of current and former students and staff. Plaintiffs include students, guardians, and school staff seeking overlapping nationwide and statewide class actions. The cases assert virtually identical claims involving negligence, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment, and discovery will address the breach, PowerSchool's data-security practices, and notice to affected individuals.

Procedural history

The Panel considered the centralization motion on the papers and at a hearing session. It found common factual questions among the actions and ordered transfer to the Southern District of California, with that court's consent, for assignment to Judge Roger T. Benitez.

Remand instructions

The actions listed on Schedule A are transferred to the Southern District of California and, with that court's consent, assigned to the Honorable Roger T. Benitez for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…