United States: Even After Remijas V. Neiman Marcus, Courts Continue To Dismiss Data Privacy Class Actions For Lack Of Standing

Torres v. The Wendy's Company

In Torres v. The Wendy's Company, No. 6:16-cv-210-Orl-40DAB (M.D. Fl. July 15, 2016), the plaintiff in a putative class action alleged that his debit card information was stolen when hackers used malicious malware to breach Wendy's computer system.  Plaintiff's Class Action Complaint alleged causes of action for breach of implied contract, negligence and violation of Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act for Wendy's failure to adequately secure his information, and alleged that the theft of his information caused: (1) future injury in the form of an increased risk of identity theft, and costs associated with that risk including monitoring his accounts and credit reports for fraudulent transactions and (2) present injury in the form of two fraudulent charges on his debit card. 

Wendy's filed a motion to dismiss for lack of standing under Article III of the United States Constitution, arguing that Plaintiff's Complaint did not sufficiently allege that he had suffered, or will imminently suffer, an injury-in-fact.  Wendy's argued that Plaintiff's claimed future injury of increased risk of identity theft cannot confer standing because such risk is a speculative future harm; that even though Plaintiff alleges he is at risk of future identity theft and fraud, the risk is too remote to establish standing under Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA, where the United States Supreme Court held that though risk of future injury can constitute an injury-in-fact, such injury must be "certainly impending" and "allegations of possible future injury are not sufficient." Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA, 133 S. Ct. 1138, 1155 (2012).  Plaintiff countered that his allegation that his information was stolen was sufficient to create the inference that he is at an imminent risk of identity theft under Remijas v. Neiman Marcus Group, LLC, 794 F.3d 688 (7th Cir. 2015), where the court held that allegations that a plaintiff's information was stolen were sufficient under Article III because it establishes a "substantial risk" of future harm. 

With regard to Plaintiff's claimed present injury of incurring fraudulent charges on his debit card, Wendy's argued that Plaintiff did not allege an actual injury-in-fact because he did not allege that any of the charges were unreimbursed by his bank.  Plaintiff contended that the fraudulent charges constituted identity theft, allegations of which are sufficient to confer standing.

The court dismissed the Complaint for lack of standing, holding that neither alleged harm was a cognizable injury-in-fact under Article III. Relying on Clapper and a host of data breach cases decided in its wake, the court held that the Complaint's allegations of an increased risk of identity theft could not confer standing because they constituted allegations of possible future injury insufficient to meet Clapper's mandate that for the threat of future injury to constitute an injury-in-fact sufficient to confer Article III standing, the threat must be "certainly impending."  The court noted that for courts considering the issue, one influential factor is the number of plaintiffs in the class action who experienced fraudulent charges. The court stated that the Complaint did not sufficiently allege certainly impending injury because it did not allege that any data other than the plaintiff's was affected, thereby distinguishing the case from Remijas v. Neiman Macus, where the plaintiffs alleged that 350,000 credit cards had been exposed to the hacker's malware and over 9,200 of those cards had been used fraudulently. The court also held that Plaintiff's allegations that he incurred costs associated with the increased risk of identity theft such as monitoring his finances and credit report could not confer standing because, under Clapper and consistent with the majority of the courts considering the issue, a plaintiff cannot "manufacture" standing by inflicting harm on himself based on fear of future harm that is not certainly impending.

The court held that the plaintiff's allegations of fraudulent charges were insufficient to confer standing because, though actual identity theft would confer standing, courts considering the issue found that mere fraudulent charges do not, in and of themselves, constitute allegations of identity theft.  Rather, the plaintiff must be allege actual monetary loss from the fraudulent charges, and as the Complaint did not contain allegations that the fraudulent charges were unreimbursed or indicate that Plaintiff suffered any other monetary loss from the charges, the Complaint did not allege actual injury-in-fact.

Despite the insistence of data breach plaintiffs that the reasoning of Remijas v. Neiman Marcus compels courts to apply a more relaxed version of Clapper's "certainly impending" standard, this case illustrates that courts in data breach cases have continued to adhere to a robust application of  Clapper's standard when analyzing whether plaintiff has sufficiently alleged an injury-in-fact. 

Manning  v. Pioneer Savings Bank

The Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Rensselaer recently dismissed a proposed class action arising from the theft of a Pioneer Savings Bank owned laptop from an employee's car. Manning v. Pioneer Savings Bank, No. 251307/2015 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Rensselaer County, July 17, 2016) (Elliott, J.). Plaintiffs purported to represent a class comprised of all New York State citizens who were Pioneer Savings Bank customers on the date thieves stole Pioneer's laptop, which contained certain customers' personally identifiable information [PII]. Pioneer argued that Plaintiffs' Complaint warranted dismissal, because Plaintiffs did not allege any injury-in-fact that resulted from the theft of the laptop sufficient to establish standing to pursue their claims.  Indeed, Pioneer noted that Plaintiffs' Complaint was devoid of any allegation of actual or attempted identity theft arising from the data incident.  Plaintiffs countered that the theft of their data contained on the laptop, the time and expense necessary to monitor their credit and the heightened risk of future harm conferred standing under New York's common law standard, which Plaintiffs claimed was less-stringent that Article III standing under the U.S. Constitution.  

Justice Elliott's Decision and Order dismissing the Complaint without prejudice agreed with Pioneer that Plaintiffs lacked individual standing to pursue their claims, because Plaintiffs failed to allege the existence of an injury in fact. The court reasoned that Plaintiffs did not establish any actual injury as a result of the data incident, as neither named Plaintiff identified any actual or attempted identity theft or any fraudulent charges. The court deemed Plaintiffs' allegations of speculative future injuries and the hypothetical issues "too remote and not sufficient enough to confer standing on Plaintiffs as they do not constitute an injury in fact." Accordingly, the court dismissed the class action without prejudice because Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate any actual injury that they sustained, and thus, could not seek relief on behalf of any other putative class members. [Editor's Note: Kudos to Lewis Brisbois attorneys Claudia McCarron and David Sherman who successfully defended Pioneer Bank in this action.]

Khan v. Children's National Health System

In Khan v. Children's Nat'l Health Sys., the United States District Court for the District of Maryland addressed whether a plaintiff had standing to pursue a claim where an unauthorized individual gained access to the email accounts of certain hospital employees when those employees responded to "phishing" emails. Civ. No. TDC-15-2125, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66404, *2 (D. Md. May 19, 2016). The email accounts contained patient names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, telephone numbers and private health care information. Id. The court characterized as plaintiff's strongest argument for Article III standing that she faced an increased risk of identity theft. Id. at 7. In analyzing whether an increased risk of identity theft confers standing, the court addressed numerous data breach decisions throughout the country, including the Seventh Circuit's decisions in Remijas v. Neiman Marcus Group, LLC, 794 F.3d 688 (7th Cir. 2015) and Lewert v. P.F. Chang's China Bistro, Inc., 819 F.3d 963 (7th Cir. 2016) and the Third Circuit's decision in Reilly v. Ceridian, 664 F.3d 38 (3d Cir. 2011). Id. at 8-15. The court recognized that the Third and Seventh Circuits had reached conflicting results, but reconciled the differences as not arising not from the application of a different legal standard, but from distinctions in the underlying facts. Id. at 11. The court concluded that in the data breach context, a plaintiff has properly alleged an injury in fact arising from increased risk of identity theft if they put forth facts that provide either: "(1) actual examples of the use of the fruits of the data breach for identity theft, even if involving other victims; or (2) a clear indication that the data breach was for the purpose of using the plaintiffs' personal data to engage in identity fraud." Id. at 15.

Applying this standard, the court held that the plaintiff alleged no facts that the hackers attempted to engage in any misuse of the patients' data since the breach was discovered. Id. at 16.  Further, the court held that the circumstances did not indicate that the breach was for the purpose of using the plaintiff's data to engage in identity theft. Id. The court reasoned that the hacker did not try to access the hospital's record system and that there was no indication that the patients' data was actually viewed, accessed, or copied, or was even the target of the phishing scheme. Id. Finally, the court dismissed the plaintiff's allegation that data breach victims are 9.5 times more likely to suffer identity theft as unpersuasive and insufficient to establish "certainly impending" harm. Id. at 17-18.  As a result, the court held that the plaintiff failed to allege a "certainly impending" injury or "substantial risk" of imminent injury sufficient to establish Article III standing. Id. at 18.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.