University of Michigan Data Breach Class Action
Last verified September 26, 2026Source: courtlistener-litigationHow ClaimWatch verifies cases
This case was recently filed and is being litigated — the claims below are allegations, not proven facts, and there is no settlement, claim form, or payout yet. Watch the case (right) and we'll email you when it moves, including if it settles and a claim process opens.
What happened
A proposed class action against Weiss and several University of Michigan officials, apparently related to a data security incident or privacy breach, as suggested by the involvement of the university's information security and IT leadership and the fraud nature of suit. The case is being coordinated with other similar 'Weiss/Keffer' cases in multidistrict litigation. These are allegations in a newly filed case and have not been proven.
Do you qualify?
No settlement exists yet, so there is nothing to file and no class definition to check. If the case settles, the settlement will define exactly who qualifies — watch this case and we'll let you know.
How to file
There is no claim to file yet. If this case reaches a settlement, a claim process will open — usually with an official settlement website and a filing deadline.
Common questions
- Can I file a claim in the University of Michigan Data Breach Class Action case?
- No. This case has been filed and is still being litigated — there is no settlement, no claim form, and no payout. Many class actions are dismissed or never certified, so a case being filed does not mean anyone will be paid. If it settles and a claim process opens, that will be announced by a court-appointed settlement administrator.
- Where is the University of Michigan Data Breach Class Action case being heard?
- The case is before the District Court, E.D. Michigan, case number 2:25-cv-10806. Everything alleged in the complaint is an allegation, not a proven fact.
Who's involved
Plaintiffs
- Jane Doe 25-10999(Consol Plaintiff)
- Jane Doe 25-10988(Consol Plaintiff)
- Jane Doe 25-10946(Consol Plaintiff)
- Jane Doe 25-10951(Consol Plaintiff)
- Jane Doe 25-10876(Consol Plaintiff)
- Jane Roe 25-10870(Consol Plaintiff)
- Jane Doe 25-10855(Consol Plaintiff)
- Jenna Schilling(Consol Plaintiff)
+ 3 more
Defendants
- Matthew Weiss [E-filer]
- John Doe
- Sol Bermann
- Ravi Pendse
- James Joseph Harbaugh
- Doug Gnodtke
- Warde J. Manuel
- Mark Schlissel
+ 5 more
Counsel for plaintiffs
- Yana HartClarkson Law Firm
- Samuel J SchillerSchiller Law Firm
- Steven M. NathanHausfeld LLP
- Mariya WeekesMilberg, PLLC
- James Joseph PizzirussoHausfeld LLP
- Gary M. KlingerMilberg PLLC
- Robert J. LantzyBuckfire & Buckfire
- Sara MickovicSommers Schwartz, P.C.
- Richard L. GroffskySommers Schwartz
- Megan BonanniPitt, McGehee,
- Matthew G. CurtisSommers Schwartz, P.C.
- Lisa M. EsserSommers Schwartz, P.C.
- Kevin Michael CarlsonPitt McGehee Palmer & Rivers PC
- Jason J. ThompsonSommers Schwartz, P.C.
- Danielle Young CanepaPitt McGehee Palmer Bonanni & Rivers PC
- Beth M. RiversPitt McGehee Palmer & Rivers
- James Gerard Stranch , IVStranch, Jennings & Garvey, PLLC
- Raina C BorrelliStrauss Borrelli PLLC
- Nathan J. FinkFink Bressack PLLC
- David H. FinkFink Bressack PLLC
- Ryan ClarksonClarkson Law Firm, P.C.
- Bryan Paul ThompsonClarkson Law Firm, P.C.
- Noah S. HurwitzHurwitz Law PLLC
- Brendan John ChildressHurwitz Law PLLC
- Patrick C. LannenStinar Lannen, PLLC
- Erik JohnsonStinar Lannen, PLLC
- Jonathan R. MarkoMarko Law, PLLC
- David L. Selby , IIBailey & Glasser
- Michael R. GriecoStinar Gould Grieco & Hensley
- Bryce Thomas HensleyStinar Gould Grieco & Hensley, PLLC
- Brian A GlasserBailey & Glasser
- Aimee WagstaffWagstaff Law Firm, PC
- Katherine E. CharonkoBailey & Glasser
- Benjamin GilligWagstaff Law Firm
- D. Todd MathewsBailey & Glasser
- John W BarrettBailey & Glasser
- Bart CohenBailey Glasser LLP
- Parker G. StinarStinar Lannen, PLLC
Counsel for defendants
Parties and counsel from the public court docket. Listing an attorney here isn't an endorsement, and ClaimWatch isn't affiliated with any of them.
In the news
Headlines via NewsAPI. ClaimWatch isn't affiliated with these publications.
New to class actions?
This summary was generated from public settlement documents and may contain errors. Confirm eligibility, deadlines, and payment terms on the official settlement website before filing. ClaimWatch is not a law firm and this is not legal advice. Filing a claim is free.
More data breach settlements
View all →Period Tracker Data Privacy Settlement (Flo, Google, Flurry)
Between November 2016 and February 2019, the Flo period and ovulation tracker app allegedly incorporated code from third-party software development kits (from Flurry, Meta, and Google) through which user information related to menstruation and pregnancy was allegedly shared without proper legal authorization. Google agreed to pay $48 million, Flo agreed to pay $8 million, and Flurry agreed to pay $3.5 million to settle. All defendants deny wrongdoing and assert they did nothing wrong.
…moreNot stated
Lands' End Data Breach Settlement
Lands' End experienced a data security incident in December 2024 that compromised certain files containing personal information of class members, including names, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, driver's license and passport information, and in some cases medical information. Lands' End denies wrongdoing, but has agreed to settle the lawsuit to avoid costs and risks of continued litigation.
…moreAmerican Vision Partners Data Breach Settlement
American Vision Partners suffered a cyberattack discovered in November 2023 that compromised personal information of approximately 1.6 million U.S. residents, including Social Security numbers for about 258,070 people. Plaintiffs allege personal information was compromised; the defendant denies this allegation.
…morePro-rata cash payments or out-of-pocket expense claims for Damages Settlement Class Members
Wayne Memorial Hospital Data Breach Settlement
Wayne Memorial Hospital had a data incident discovered on or around June 3, 2024, in which certain files may have been accessed without authorization between approximately May 30 and June 3, 2024. The hospital notified potentially impacted individuals on or around August 27, 2025. The lawsuit alleges the hospital was negligent in failing to prevent the data incident. The hospital denies all allegations.
…more