Joint Declaration of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin — In re BofA Unemployment Litigation (Dkt. 324-161)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California · No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB · Doc. 324-161 · 2024-08-29 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

Joint Decl of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOSEPH W. COTCHETT (SBN 36324) 
jcotchett@cpmlegal.com 
BRIAN DANITZ (SBN 247403) 
bdanitz@cpmlegal.com 
KARIN B. SWOPE (Pro Hac Vice) 
kswope@cpmlegal.com 
ANDREW F. KIRTLEY (SBN 328023) 
akirtley@cpmlegal.com 
VASTI S. MONTIEL (SBN 346409) 
vmontiel@cpmlegal.com 
COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP 
840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200 
Burlingame, CA 94010 
Telephone: (650) 697-6000 
Fax: (650) 697-0577 
MICHAEL RUBIN (SBN 80618) 
mrubin@altber.com 
STACEY M. LEYTON (SBN 203827) 
sleyton@altber.com 
CONNIE K. CHAN (SBN 284230) 
cchan@altber.com 
KATHERINE G. BASS (SBN 344748) 
kbass@altber.com 
COLIN C. JONES (SBN 354301) 
cjones@altber.com 
ALTSHULER BERZON LLP 
177 Post Street, Suite 300 
San Francisco, CA 94108 
Telephone: (415) 421-7151 
Fax: (415) 362-8064 
Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class  
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
IN RE BANK OF AMERICA 
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT 
BENEFITS LITIGATION 
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
 
JOINT DECLARATION OF BRIAN 
DANITZ AND MICHAEL RUBIN IN 
SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLASS 
CERTIFICATION 
 
Judge: 
Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel 
Ctrm: 
2D (2nd Floor) 
Date:   
January 17, 2025 
Time:  
1:30 pm 
 
 
This Document Relates to All Actions 
 
 
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7239 
Page 1 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
1
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
We, Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin, hereby state, under the penalty of perjury, as 
follows: 
1. 
We, Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin, are partners at the law firms of 
Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, LLP (“CPM”) and Altshuler Berzon LLP (“Altshuler 
Berzon”), respectively. We have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein based 
on our active supervision of and participation in the matters discussed below. If called 
upon, we could and would testify competently thereto. 
2. 
This declaration is filed in support of the accompanying motion for class 
certification, which seeks class certification and appointment of CPM and Altshuler 
Berzon as co-lead counsel. On March 29, 2021, the Court in Yick v. Bank of America, 
N.A., 3:21-cv-00376-VC (N.D. January 14, 2021), the initial class action case filed by 
CPM on behalf of Jennifer Yick and similarly situated individuals, granted Plaintiffs’ 
motion to consolidate nine related cases and appointed CPM and Altshuler Berzon as 
interim co-lead counsel in that consolidated action.  On June 4, 2021, the United States 
Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL”) ordered the consolidated case 
transferred to the Southern District of California Case No. 21-md-02992-LAB. On July 
20, 2021, the Court appointed CPM and Altshuler Berzon as Interim Co-Lead Counsel in 
the MDL case.   
3. 
Since before the filing of the complaints in Yick and the related cases leading 
to this consolidated MDL proceeding, CPM and Altshuler Berzon have done extensive 
work and committed significant resources to identify and investigate potential claims in 
the action, including: obtaining and analyzing Bank of America’s exclusive contract with 
EDD, as well as Bank of America’s customer agreements, SEC filings, press releases, and 
other public statements; submitting public record requests to both EDD and the State 
Auditor; reviewing relevant legislative hearings and agency reports; and communicating 
with well over 1,000 potential plaintiffs who reached out to our firms and our co-counsels’ 
firms following the filing of the Yick Complaint, including those who retained CPM, 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7240 
Page 2 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
2
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Altshuler Berzon, and/or our co-counsel and who are now serving as class plaintiffs in this 
matter. 
4. 
Our law firms have continued working with public agencies, non-profit 
advocacy groups representing low-wage workers, and hundreds of members of the 
proposed class, to identify and investigate additional facts for the Consolidated Amended 
Complaint and motion for preliminary injunction. 
5. 
We also organized the parties in the Yick consolidated action and these MDL 
proceedings, by bringing motions to relate cases and the motion to consolidate and 
appoint, and by continuing to meet and confer with the parties regarding scheduling and 
other procedural matters, and filing stipulations and motions. 
6. 
As Interim Co-Lead Counsel in Yick, CPM and Altshuler Berzon researched 
and drafted the Consolidated Class Action Complaint and the Motion for Preliminary 
Injunction, both of which were filed on April 1, 2021. The Consolidated Class Action 
Complaint and the Motion for Preliminary Injunction in Yick were the products of CPM’s 
and Altshuler Berzon’s months-long investigation, and the Motion for Preliminary 
Injunction was supported by more than three dozen witness declarations detailing the 
common factual bases for relief in this action. 
7. 
On May 17, 2021, the district court in Yick granted Plaintiffs’ Motion for 
Preliminary Injunction and provisionally certified a Rule 23(b)(2) class, concluding that 
Plaintiffs had shown a “strong likelihood of success” on their EFTA and UCL claims 
because the Bank had “fail[ed] to conduct an adequate, good faith investigation when 
[EDD] cardholders report[ed] unauthorized charges,” and instead relied on “a faulty 
screening process” (i.e., the CFF) as the sole basis for denying claims and freezing 
accounts. 
8. 
CPM and Altshuler Berzon also represented the Plaintiffs in the In re Bank 
of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation, MDL No. 2992, before the 
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, which transferred all of the related 
actions against Bank of America to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7241 
Page 3 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
3
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9. 
CPM and Altshuler Berzon have continued to be actively involved in every 
aspect of this MDL litigation since its inception including by filing three comprehensive 
consolidated complaints and successfully opposing Bank of America’s motions to dismiss 
including the most recent order issued on June 25, 2024 granting in part and denying in 
part Defendant’s motion to dismiss and granting plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration.  
10. 
 CPM and Altshuler Berzon have also engaged in comprehensive discovery 
including pursuing document requests and interrogatories served on Bank of America and 
subpoenas served on third parties, extensive search term negotiations and motion practice, 
and review of documents produced by Bank of America, third parties, and government 
agencies. CPM and Altshuler Berzon also deposed six of the Bank’s 30(b)(6) witnesses 
and one key Bank of America employee and have spent countless hours reviewing and 
analyzing documents and discovery responses.  
11. 
CPM and Altshuler Berzon have also responded to Bank of America’s 
written discovery, including over 50 document requests served on each of the Class 
Plaintiffs and Third-Party Subpoenas to Produce Documents, have prepared five Class 
Representatives for testimony and defended the Class Representative depositions, and 
held multiple meet and confer calls with Bank of America’s counsel regarding discovery 
disputes including those involving confidentiality designations and privilege log 
challenges resulting in the production of additional documents. CPM and Altshuler 
Berzon have further met and consulted with several experts on the issues in this case.  
12. 
Collectively, CPM and Altshuler Berzon have devoted more than 18,000 
hours to litigating this case, and to date, CPM and Altshuler Berzon have incurred 
approximately $900,000 in costs.  
13. 
A true and correct copy of CPM’s Firm Resume is attached as Exhibit A. 
14. 
Based on the San Francisco Peninsula for over half a century, CPM engages 
exclusively in litigation and trials. The firm’s dedication to prosecuting or defending 
socially just actions has earned it a national reputation. CPM has offices in Burlingame, 
California, Santa Monica, California. and Seattle, Washington. 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7242 
Page 4 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
4
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
15. 
CPM is repeatedly named to the National Law Journal’s list of top plaintiff 
litigation firms in the United States and, the National Law Journal named CPM to its 
inaugural list of Elite Trial Lawyers. The Daily Journal, California’s leading legal 
publication, has also named CPM as one of the top law firms in Northern California that 
have extensive actual trial experience in complex cases. As set forth in the Firm Resume 
attached hereto, CPM has served as Lead or Co-Lead Counsel in numerous class action 
and complex cases in federal and California state courts. The firm possesses extensive 
experience in cases based on consumer protection and unfair competition statutes, mass 
torts, privacy and data breaches, product defects, and antitrust and securities matters, 
among other practice areas. CPM also has the resources necessary to vigorously prosecute 
complex actions and protect the interests of class members and, importantly, proven trial 
experience. CPM has been acknowledged by courts and counsel for trying complex cases 
efficiently and effectively to courts and juries. 
16. 
While CPM’s extensive background is further detailed at its website, 
www.cpmlegal.com, and in the attached Firm Resume, examples of CPM’s experience 
leading significant complex cases include In Re Wells Fargo & Company Consolidated 
Derivative Shareholder Litigation, 3:22-cv-05173-TLT (N.D. Cal.) (CPM co-lead counsel 
in derivative suit relating to discriminatory lending and hiring practices); Pampena v. 
Musk, 3:22-CV-05937-CRB (N.D. Cal.) (CPM co-lead counsel in securities class action 
relating to alleged manipulation of the market for Twitter stock in connection with Elon 
Musk’s acquisition of Twitter); In re Apple Device Performance Litigation, No. 5:18-md-
02827-EJD (CPM co-lead counsel in consumer class action multi-district litigation 
relating to throttling of iPhone performance, resulting in a $310-$500 million settlement); 
In the Matter of The Petition for The Coordination of Maui Fire Cases S.P. No. 2CSP-23-
0000057 (CPM active member of the Plaintiffs Steering Committee instrumental in 
helping to broker a resolution resulting in a $4.03 billion settlement); In re Bextra and 
Celebrex Marketing Sales Practices and Product Liability Litigation, No. 05-md-01699-
CRB (N.D. Cal.) (CPM co-lead trial counsel consolidated injury and class action cases 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7243 
Page 5 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
5
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
related to pain killers Bextra & Celebrex, resulting in $894 million settlement); In re Static 
Random Access Memory (SRAM) Antitrust Litigation, No. 07-md-01819-CW (N.D. Cal.) 
(CPM lead counsel for direct purchasers of Static Random Access Memory chips, 
resulting in $77 million settlement);  Salman, et al. v. Darbee, et al., JCCP Action No. 
4648 (CPM co-lead counsel against Officers and Directors of PG&E arising out of the San 
Bruno Fire & Explosion, resulting in one of the top 10 largest Shareholder Derivative 
Settlements in U.S. history).  
17. 
CPM’s efforts in this case are being led by Joseph Cotchett, Frank Pitre, Brian 
Danitz, and Karin Swope, as well as the firm’s extensive support staff. Joseph Cotchett, 
CPM’s founding partner, is considered one of the foremost trial lawyers in the country 
and has been named one of the most 100 influential lawyers in the nation for the past 15 
years. Over his 50-plus-year career, Cotchett has tried more than 100 cases to verdict and 
settled hundreds more. In the 1980s, Cotchett won mammoth judgments for investors in 
white-collar fraud cases and was lead trial lawyer for 23,000 plaintiffs in the In re 
American Continental Corp./Lincoln Savings & Loan Securities Litigation in 1990 
involving Charles Keating, attorneys, banks, and accountants. The trial resulted in one of 
the largest jury verdicts in history, $3.3 billion. In recent years, Cotchett has taken on 
major corporations such as Enron, Worldcom, Global Crossing, Qwest, and Lehman 
Brothers, including being lead co-trial counsel in the now landmark $1.1 billion toxic lead 
paint verdict. 
18. 
Frank Pitre is a senior partner at CPM and a consummate trial attorney with 
over 45 years of experience specializing in mass torts, consumer fraud, and commercial 
torts. Pitre is consistently recognized for his deep experience in litigating complex mass 
torts with multiple trial phases. His skill as a trial lawyer has earned him recognition 
among his peers who have elected him a member of the prestigious American College of 
Trial Lawyers, American Board of Trial Advocates (Advocate), International Academy of 
Trial Lawyers, International Society of Barristers, and the National Board of Trial 
Advocacy.  He is a member and past President of the Consumer Attorneys of California 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7244 
Page 6 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
6
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(CAOC) and has received accolades for his trial advocacy and results including most 
recently being selected as One of Northern California's Top 10 Lawyers by Super Lawyers 
for the tenth consecutive year. Pitre's experience in mass tort cases began in 1987 with the 
PSA Air Crash Cases, representing numerous plaintiffs in wrongful death actions 
following the crash of PSA Flight 1771; he served as a member of the Plaintiffs Steering 
Committee, and later as plaintiffs co-lead trial counsel for the six-week jury trial which 
established the defendants' liability. The success of the PSA Air Crash Cases led to his 
appointment as a member of the Plaintiffs Steering Committee in Carnahan et al. v. State 
of California, which successfully resolved hundreds of claims for personal injuries and 
damages against more than 100 defendants.  Pitre coordinated, prosecuted, and resolved 
over 200 claims of injury, death, and property destruction against PG&E in In Re: San 
Bruno Fire Cases: JCCP Action No. 4648. Pitre also serves as a member of the Plaintiffs 
Executive Committee in the prosecution of cases In Re Ethiopian Airlines Flight ET 302 
Crash, 19-cv-02170 against Boeing arising from the Ethiopian Airlines crash of a 737 
Max 8 in Addis Ababa on March 10, 2019, which killed 149 passengers and 8 crew 
members. Since January 2018, he has served as Co-Lead Counsel In Re: California North 
Bay Fire Cases, JCCP Action No. 4955 on behalf of the victims of the North Bay Wild 
Fires to prosecute claims against PG&E for its mismanagement of electrical operations 
leading to 43 deaths, 100,000 people displaced, over 245,000 acres burned and more than 
14,700 homes and structures destroyed. Concurrently, he served as a member of the 
Plaintiffs Executive Committee in statewide mass tort actions prosecuted against PG&E 
arising out of the Butte Wildfire. In Re: Butte Fire Cases, JCCP Action No. 4853. Since 
October 2023, Pitre has served as an active member of the Plaintiffs Steering Committee 
in the prosecution of cases on behalf of over 300 individuals, property owners and small 
businesses in the In the Matter of The Petition for The Coordination of Maui Fire Cases 
S.P. No. 2CSP-23-0000057 seeking justice against Hawaiian Electric, government 
entities, telecom companies and landowners for their role in causing the August 7 and 8 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7245 
Page 7 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
7
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
devastating wildfires on the Island of Maui. The Maui Fire cases recently settled for $4.03 
billion.  
19. 
Brian Danitz has served as plaintiffs’ counsel in numerous consumer and 
securities class actions in the country, most in California state and federal courts. Danitz 
is currently serving as co-lead counsel in In re Slack Technologies Shareholder Litigation, 
No. 19CIV05370 (San Mateo Sup. Ct.), representing tens of thousands of investors who 
bought stock in the initial public offering of Slack, alleging that the registration statement 
and prospectus contained misleading information about the company’s condition, and was 
an attorney for Lead Counsel in In re Apple Inc. Device Performance Litigation, No. 18-
md-02827-EJD, MDL No. 1699 (N.D. Cal.), representing millions of consumer cell phone 
owners whose phones were throttled by Apple, which concluded with a settlement of $310 
million to $500 million. Other cases include shareholder derivative suits (e.g., Tribble v. 
Gerrans, No. CIV1803695 (Marin Sup. Ct.)) and suits brought on behalf of the victims of 
Ponzi schemes (Koo v. Happe, No. 19CIV00270925 (Sacramento Sup. Ct.)). His pro-bono 
activities range from prosecuting cases on behalf elder abuse victims (Hatch v. Kantz, No. 
18CIV537546 (San Mateo Sup. Ct.)) to representing municipalities in cases challenging 
the constitutionality of government actions (City of San Jose v. Trump, No. 17-cv-05329-
WHA (N.D. Cal.); City of Richmond v. Trump, No. 17-cv-01535-WHO (N.D. Cal.)). Prior 
to joining CPM, Danitz litigated numerous class actions and derivative cases as an attorney 
at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati in Palo Alto, including Bien v. Lifelock Inc., No. 
CV-14-00416-PHX-SRB (D. Ariz.); Zucker v. Andreessen, No. 6014-VCP (Del. Ch.); 
Mogensen v. Body Cent. Corp., No. 3:12-cv-954-J-20-JRK (M.D. Fla.); In re HP Sec. 
Litig., No. 3:12-CV-05980-CRB (N.D. Cal.); In re HP ERISA Litig., No. C-12-6199-CRB 
(N.D. Cal.); In re Hewlett-Packard Co. Sec. Litig., No. 11-1404-AG-RNB (C.D. Cal.); In 
re HP Derivative Litig., 5:10-cv-3608-EJD (N.D. Cal.); In re Taleo Corp. Sec. Litig., No. 
C 09-00151-JSW (N.D. Cal.); City of Roseville Employees' Ret. Sys. v. Sterling Fin. Corp., 
No. 2:09-cv-00368-SAB (E.D. Wash.); and Pfeifer v. Himax Techs., Inc., No. CV 07-
05468-DDP-AGR (C.D. Cal.). Danitz is active in the legal community, serving on the 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7246 
Page 8 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
8
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
California State Bar Judicial Nominees Evaluation Commission, serving on the Board of 
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Historical Society, and 
volunteering in local bar activities such as mock trial competitions for high school 
students. 
20. 
Karin Swope has served as lead counsel and on steering committees in 
national consumer, privacy, and pension fraud class actions. Swope has particular 
expertise in E-Discovery and Intellectual Property, having been appointed as the ESI and 
Offensive Discovery Co-Coordinator in the In re Apple Device Performance Litigation. 
Swope has also served as an attorney for Lead Counsel on other consumer, privacy, and 
pension fraud cases, including cases against Intellius, Wells Fargo, Facebook, and 
Washington Mutual. Swope is active in community affairs, currently serving as an adjunct 
professor at Seattle University School of Law where she teaches the Intellectual Property 
Art Law Clinic and is President of the Intellectual Property Section of the Washington 
State Bar Association. She has also taught numerous CLEs on E-Discovery and 
Intellectual Property. 
21. 
A true and correct copy of Altshuler Berzon’s firm resume is attached hereto 
as Exhibit B. 
22. 
Altshuler Berzon specializes in labor and employment, environmental 
constitutional, campaign and election, consumer, and civil rights law. Since its founding 
in 1978, the firm has been on the forefront of protecting workers’ and consumers’ rights. 
The firm has obtained multi-million dollar judgments and settlements, as well as court-
ordered and negotiated injunctive relief on behalf of consumers and workers. The firm 
also frequently represents consumers and workers on appeal. 
23. 
In 2015, Judge Lucy Koh appointed Altshuler Berzon as co-lead counsel in 
In Re Anthem, Inc. Data Breach Litigation, N.D. Cal. No: 15-md-02617-LHK (NC), a 
massive data breach case encompassing four consolidated class action complaints, which 
required plaintiffs’ counsel to review 3.8 million pages of documents, to depose 18 
percipient fact witnesses, 62 corporate designees, and six defense experts, and to exchange 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7247 
Page 9 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
9
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
76 interrogatories, 731 RFAs, and 18 expert reports with Defendants before the case 
settled for $115 million. 
24. 
In recent years, Altshuler Berzon attorneys have secured multi-million dollar 
judgments in other class cases as well, including Blair v. Rent-A-Center, 2020 WL 408970 
(N.D. Cal. 2020); Beaver v. Tarsadia Hotels, 2020 WL 1139662 (S.D. Cal. 2020); Sanchez 
v. McDonald’s Restaurants of California, Inc., Los Angeles Superior Court No. 
BC488999; Smiles v. Walgreen Co., Alameda County Superior Court No. RG17862495; 
Henderson v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, C.D. Cal. No. 2:11-CV-03428 PSG (PLAx); Hall 
v. Rite Aid Corp., San Diego Superior Court No. 37-2009-00087938-CU-OE-CTL; 
Kashmiri v. Regents of the University of California, 156 Cal.App.4th 809 (2007); and 
Luquetta v. Regents of the University of California (San Francisco Superior Court Case 
No. CGC-05-443007, among many others. Altshuler Berzon attorneys have also worked 
on significant appellate issues in dozens of cases. 
25. 
Altshuler Berzon is knowledgeable about and has experience litigating the 
applicable law relevant to this case, including the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth 
Amendment, California’s Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §17200 et seq. 
(“UCL”), the California Consumer Privacy Act, Cal. Civ. Code §1798.80 et seq. 
(“CCPA”), and the various common law claims at issue including negligence, negligent 
hiring and supervision, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and 
breach of fiduciary duty. 
26. 
Michael Rubin graduated in 1977 from the Georgetown University Law 
Center, and joined Altshuler Berzon LLP (then known as Altshuler & Berzon) in 
November 1981 after having clerked for U.S. District Court Judge Charles B. Renfrew 
(N. D. Cal.), Ninth Circuit Chief Judge James R. Browning Jr., and Supreme Court 
Associate Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. For many years, he has specialized in complex 
civil litigation, including class actions and appeals. Rubin is a seven-time recipient of a 
“California Lawyer of the Year” award by California Lawyer magazine and has been listed 
for many years in “The Best Lawyers in America” in the categories of labor and 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7248 
Page 10 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
10
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
employment law and appellate law, and as a Northern California “Super Lawyer” in the 
areas of appellate practice, labor and employment, and class actions. He has repeatedly 
been named one of the “Top 100 California Lawyers,” and one of the “Top 75 Labor and 
Employment Lawyers” by the Daily Journal. He is an elected Fellow of the College of 
Labor and Employment Lawyers, and a former member of the Board of Directors of the 
AFL-CIO’s Lawyers’ Coordinating Committee. 
27. 
Among the many class actions in which Rubin and his colleagues at Altshuler 
Berzon have served as class counsel or co-class counsel are: Center for Workers’ Rights 
v. EDD, Alameda County Superior Court No. RG21106525 (co-lead counsel in class 
action on behalf of unemployment insurance claimants whose access to benefits during 
COVID-19 pandemic was wrongfully denied by state agency’s policies and practices); In 
Re Anthem, Inc. Data Breach Litigation, N.D. Cal. No. 15-md-02617-LHK (NC) (co-lead 
counsel in a massive data breach case encompassing four consolidated class action 
complaints that resulted in a $115 million settlement—the largest data breach settlement 
in U.S. history at the time); Ellis v. Google, Inc., San Francisco Superior Court No. CGC-
17-561299 (co-lead counsel in class action under the California Equal Pay Act alleging 
that Google paid women employees less than it paid men with similar qualifications 
performing similar work that settled for $118 million); Vaughn v. Tesla, Alameda County 
Superior Court No. RG17882082 (appellate counsel in race harassment class action 
against automobile manufacturer); Bunn v. Nike, Inc., N.D. Cal. No. 20-cv-7403-YGR 
(co-lead counsel in Americans with Disabilities Act challenge to retailer’s failure to 
accommodate hearing-disabled customers after implementing COVID-19 protocols); 
Schuman v. Microchip Technologies, Inc., N.D. Cal. No. 4:16-cv-05544-HSG (ERISA 
class action challenging acquiring company’s refusal to honor predecessor’s severance 
plan affecting more than 200 terminated employees); Ibarra v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.D. 
Cal. No. 5:17-cv-06220-BLF (appellate counsel and co-counsel in consolidated class 
actions challenging bank’s methodology for calculating California rest break wage 
premiums, resulting in $90 million settlement); Ridgeway v. Walmart Inc., 946 F.3d 1066 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7249 
Page 11 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
11
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(9th Cir. 2020) (appellate counsel in case affirming $54 million jury verdict in truck 
drivers’ California minimum wage law claims based on mandatory layover and rest break 
time); Hernandez v. VES McDonald’s, Alameda County Superior Ct. No. RG20064825 
(obtained TRO and preliminary injunction in public nuisance class action on behalf of 
employees and community members exposed to COVID 19 as a result of fast-food 
restaurant that failed to follow required legal protocols); Nobles v. MBNA Corp., No. C06-
3723-CRB (N.D. Cal.) (settlement of California consumer class action alleging that a bank 
misleadingly offered consumer lines of credit without disclosing hidden costs and credit 
impacts); Fanning et al. v. HSBC Card Services Inc. et al., No. 12-cv-00885-JVS (C.D. 
Cal.) and Lindgren v. HSBC Card Services Inc. et al., No. 14-cv-05615-JVS (C.D. Cal.) 
(settlement of statewide class action on behalf of California credit card holders alleging 
the bank secretly recorded their telephone conversations without their consent); Kashmiri 
v. Regents of the University of California, 156 Cal.App.4th 809 (2007) ($33.8 million 
class-action judgment against the University of California for improperly charging fee 
increases to tens of thousands of undergraduate, graduate, and professional students; 
preliminary injunction prohibiting University from charging professional students an 
additional $15 million in fees). 
28. 
Rubin is currently lead or co-counsel in several trial court class actions, 
including: McBurnie v. Acceptance Now, LLC, , Case No. 3:21-cv-01429-JD (N.D. Cal.) 
(class action on behalf of low-income consumers against rent-to-own company that 
allegedly violates price-cap restrictions imposed by California’s Karnette Rental Purchase 
Act and UCL); Candelore v. Tinder, Inc., Los Angeles Superior Court No. BC583162 
(240,000 member certified class alleging age-based pricing discrimination in violation of 
Unruh Act and UCL); World Association of Ice Hockey Players Unions et al. v. National 
Hockley Lague et al., S.D. N.Y. No. 1:24-cv-01066 (antitrust class action against NHL 
and Canadian Hockey Leagues on behalf of teenaged major junior league hockey players 
subjected to mandatory drafts and reserve clauses without the protection of a collective 
bargaining agreement) Council v. Ivey et al., M.D. Alabama No. 2:23-cv-00712-ECM-
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7250 
Page 12 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
12
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JTA (RICO, Klu Klux Klan Act, Trafficking Victims Protection Act, and constitutional 
class action against Alabama prison authorities for forced labor and wrongful race-based 
parole scheme violations); Schuman v. Microchip Technologies, Inc., N.D. Cal. No. N.D. 
Cal. No. 4:16-cv-05544-HSG (ERISA class action challenging acquiring company’s 
refusal to honor predecessor’s severance plan affecting more than 200 terminated 
employees). 
29. 
Stacey M. Leyton graduated first in her class from Stanford Law School in 
1998. She served as a law clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, Ninth 
Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt, and U.S. District Court Judge Susan Illston. She has 
previously served as both an Appellate Representative to the Ninth Circuit Judicial 
Conference and a Lawyer Representative to the Northern District of California. She has 
had an active federal court practice for the past 20 years at Altshuler Berzon, at both the 
trial and appellate court level, involving a variety of state and federal statutory, common 
law, and constitutional issues.  She has served as lead counsel or co-lead counsel in 
numerous federal court cases including in those that produced the following published 
decisions during the past four years: Polk v. Yee, 36 F.4th 939 (9th Cir. 2022); Jimenez v. 
Service Employees Int’l Union Local 775, 590 F.Supp.3d 1349 (E.D. Wash. 2022); Trees 
v. Service Employees Int’l Union Local 503, 574 F.Supp.3d 856 (D. Or. 2021); Service 
Employees Int’l Union Local 87 v. NLRB, 995 F.3d 1032 (9th Cir. 2021); California 
Trucking Ass’n v. Bonta, 996 F.3d 644 (9th Cir. 2021); California by and Through Becerra 
v. Azar, 501 F.Supp.3d 830 (N.D. Cal. 2020); Polk v. Yee, 481 F.Supp.3d 1060 (E.D. Cal. 
2020); William Morris Endeavor Entertainment, LLC v. Writers Guild of America, 478 
F.Supp.3d 932; 432 F.Supp.3d 1127 (C.D. Cal. 2020); Oakland Bulk & Oversized 
Terminal, LLC v. City of Oakland, 960 F.3d 603 (9th Cir. 2020) (appellate level only); 
Evans Hotels, LLC v. Unite Here Local 30, 433 F.Supp.3d 1130 (S.D. Cal. 2020); Quirarte 
v. United Domestic Workers AFSCME Local 3930, 438 F.Supp.3d 1108 (S.D. Cal. 2020).  
She served as lead class counsel in Dominguez v. Schwarzenegger, N.D. Cal. Case. No. 
09-02306-CW.  In 2011, she was named a “California Lawyer of the Year” by California 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7251 
Page 13 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
13
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Lawyer Magazine for her work in a case challenging cutbacks to the California program 
providing in home care to Medicaid recipients.  She has been selected on numerous 
occasions to the Northern California Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers in America for 
exceptional work in appellate practice, Lawdragon Leading Civil Rights and Plaintiff 
Employment Lawyers, and Benchmark Plaintiff California Local Litigation Stars, 
Benchmark Top Women Attorneys in Northern California, and Benchmark Plaintiff Top 
Women in Litigation. 
30. 
Connie K. Chan is a graduate of Yale College and Yale Law School. She 
served as a law clerk to Judge Michael Daly Hawkins of the United States Court of 
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and to Judge Lucy H. Koh of the United States District Court 
for the Northern District of California. In 2017, she was named a “California Lawyer of 
the Year” in Worker Health and Safety. She has been selected to the Northern California 
Super Lawyers every year since 2022 and has been listed as one of Lawdragon Magazine’s 
500 leading plaintiff employment and civil rights lawyers every year since 2021. She has 
served as plaintiff’s counsel or class counsel in numerous class actions in both federal and 
state trial court, including: Jewett v. Oracle Corp., Case No. 17-CIV-02669 (San Mateo 
Super. Ct.) (class counsel in $25 million settlement, pending final approval, of statewide 
class action on behalf of women employees for alleged violations of the California Equal 
Pay Act and UCL); Spicher v. Aidells Sausage Co., Case No. 3:15-cv-05012-WHO (N.D. 
Cal.) (class counsel in settlement of statewide class action on behalf of low-wage workers 
alleging various violations of the Labor Code); and Cancilla v. Ecolab, Inc., Case No. 12-
cv-03001-JD (N.D. Cal.); (class counsel in settlement of nationwide class action on behalf 
of low-wage workers alleging misclassification under the Fair Labor Standards Act and 
various state wage-and-hour laws). During her time as a deputy city attorney in the 
Affirmative Litigation Division of the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office from 2018-
2020, she also served as lead counsel in People of the State of California v. Intuit, Inc., 
Case No. 19STCV15644 (Los Angeles Super. Ct.), the first public enforcement action 
against Intuit Inc. regarding its allegedly deceptive advertising of “free” online TurboTax 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7252 
Page 14 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
14
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
products to low-income taxpayers eligible for the Internal Revenue Service Free File 
Program, which ultimately resolved as part of a nationwide $141 million settlement.   
 
We each declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing facts are true and 
correct. Executed on this 29TH day of August 2024, in the State of California. 
 
/s/ Brian Danitz  
 
    
/s/ Michael Rubin  
 
 
Brian Danitz 
 
 
 
Michael Rubin 
 
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7253 
Page 15 of 16

 
Joint Decl. of Brian Danitz and Michael Rubin ISO Motion for Class Certification;  
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
15
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SIGNATURE ATTESTATION 
Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I, Brian Danitz, attest that the other signatories 
listed, and on whose behalf this filing is submitted, concur in the filing content and have 
authorized this filing. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Brian Danitz 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BRIAN DANITZ 
 
 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-161     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.7254 
Page 16 of 16

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.324.161.pdf

Size

600,776 bytes

SHA-256

75ce153a44f2a33d192743f7e02766d2c7c681a531b1ff6b9d554e8bbcaf6daf

Our copy

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.324.161.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)