Reported / Citable
Background
Six putative class actions alleged that Catalyst Brands LLC, JCPenney, and, in one action, Authentic Brands Group LLC failed to protect sensitive employment-related information exposed in a June 2026 data breach. The allegedly compromised information included names, W-2 tax records, and Social Security numbers.
The plaintiffs moved to consolidate the actions, appoint Gerald D. Wells III and Raina C. Borrelli as interim class counsel, stay pleading and other deadlines, and establish deadlines for a consolidated complaint and defendants’ response. Defendants consented to consolidation, the requested stay, and the proposed pleading schedule but took no position on interim class counsel.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted the motion in part, consolidating all six actions for pretrial proceedings and trial under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a). It found that the cases arose from the same alleged data breach, presented overlapping claims for similarly defined putative classes, and sought similar relief. Consolidation would promote judicial economy, reduce litigation costs, and avoid inconsistent rulings, while creating minimal prejudice because the cases were at the same early procedural stage.
The court designated Feldman v. Catalyst Brands LLC, No. 4:26-cv-00649, as the lead case and appointed Wells and Borrelli as interim class counsel under Rule 23(g). It denied the requested stay, directed plaintiffs to file a consolidated class-action complaint within 45 days, and gave defendants 45 days after that filing to answer or otherwise respond.
Key Takeaways
- Six putative class actions arising from the same alleged JCPenney-related data breach were consolidated for all purposes.
- The Feldman action became the lead case under Master File No. 4:26-cv-00649, and future filings must be made on that docket.
- The court appointed two lawyers as interim class counsel but declined to stay pleading and other deadlines.
Why It Matters
The order places the related data-breach claims under unified management before one judge, reducing duplicative discovery, motion practice, and the risk of inconsistent decisions. It also centralizes authority over plaintiffs’ litigation and settlement strategy in the appointed interim class counsel.
The ruling does not certify a class or decide the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims. It governs the organization and schedule of the litigation while the proposed class remains putative.