CClaimWatch
Plaintiff counsel in 3 casesDefense counsel in 2 cases

Daniel Beck, Assistant U.S. Attorney

Address of record
EDELMAN COMBS LATTURNER & GOODWIN, LLC, Suite 1800, 20 S. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60603-0000
Email
daniel.beck@usdoj.gov

Contact details as filed with the court in the cases below.

5
Cases tracked
5 active · 0 settled
—
Plaintiff-side recovery
Disclosed settlement funds
—
Defense-side exposure
Resolved in settlements
0
Cases with values
of 5 tracked

Case history

Publicly tracked matters where this attorney is listed as counsel.

Plaintiff counselActive litigation — no settlement yet

Infosys Employment Class Action

A proposed class action against Infosys Technologies Limited, Inc., apparently concerning employment-related claims, as indicated by the 'Jobs' nature of suit. The case appears to involve current or former employees as plaintiffs, though the specific allegations are not detailed in the docket text. These are allegations only, not proven facts.

Filed
July 28, 2025
Represents
BRENDA KOEHLER, KELLY PARKER, LAYLA BOLTEN, GREGORY HANDLOSER
Plaintiff counselActive litigation — no settlement yet

Union Pacific Railroad Personal Injury Class Action

This proposed class action against Union Pacific Railroad Company appears to concern personal injury claims, as indicated by the nature of suit 'Other Personal Injury.' The docket reflects an appeal with consolidated cases, but specific allegations are not detailed in the provided entries. These are allegations in litigation, not proven facts.

Filed
July 14, 2025
Represents
REGINALD CLAY
Defense counselActive litigation — no settlement yet

Kristi Noem Immigration Enforcement Class Action

This appears to be an appeal in a putative class action against federal officials, including Kristi Noem, Kash Patel, Pamela Bondi, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The appellees include individual immigrants and organizations such as United Farm Workers of America and Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, suggesting the case concerns immigration enforcement and the rights of immigrant workers. The available docket text does not detail the specific allegations.

Filed
July 14, 2025
Represents
KRISTI NOEM, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, PAMELA BONDI, ATTORNEY GENERAL, U.S. Attorney General, UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, TODD M. LYONS, Acting Los Angeles Field Office Director, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, RODNEY S. SCOTT, In his official capacity as Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, MICHAEL W. BANKS, In his official capacity as Chief of U.S. Border Patrol, KASH PATEL, In his official capacity as Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, ERNESTO SANTACRUZ, JR., In his official capacity as Acting Field Office Director for Los Angeles, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, EDDY WANG, Special Agent in Charge for Los Angeles, Homeland Security Investigations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, GREGORY K. BOVINO, In his official capacity as Chief Patrol Agent for El Centro Sector of the U.S. Border Patrol, JEFFREY D. STALNAKER, In his official capacity as Acting Chief Patrol Agent, San Diego Sector of the U.S. Border Patrol, AKIL DAVIS, In his official capacity as Assistant Director in Charge, Los Angeles Office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, BILAL A. ESSAYLI, In his official capacity as U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California
Defense counselActive litigation — no settlement yet

Clearview AI Privacy Class Action

A proposed class action against Clearview AI, Inc., apparently concerning allegations that the company collected and used individuals' facial recognition data without consent, in violation of privacy statutes. The Seventh Circuit vacated the district court's approval of a settlement and remanded for further proceedings.

Filed
April 21, 2025
Represents
MACY'S, INCORPORATED, CLEARVIEW AI, INC., HOAN TON-THAT, RICHARD SCHWARTZ, ROCKY MOUNTAIN DATA ANALYTICS LLC
Plaintiff counselActive litigation — no settlement yet

Walmart Class Action

This is a proposed class action against Walmart, apparently brought by an individual plaintiff. The specific allegations are not detailed in the docket, but the case is before the Ninth Circuit on Walmart's petition for permission to appeal a class certification ruling under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f). The underlying claims remain allegations and have not been proven.

Filed
March 14, 2025
Represents
WALMART INC.

“Recovery” and “exposure” refer to total disclosed settlement funds in associated cases, not money personally won or lost by an attorney. Settlements generally resolve disputed allegations without a finding that either side won. Data comes from public court dockets and may be incomplete.