Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-md-02617/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-md-02617-35/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

---

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

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

IN RE ANTHEM, INC. DATA BREACH

LITIGATION

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER 

Judge: Lucy H. Koh

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

Steve Wickens, individually and on behalf of

All others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

BLUE CROSS OF CALIFORNIA, INC, 

d/b/a/ Anthem Blue Cross; Anthem Blue 

Cross Life and Health Insurance Company.

Defendant.

Case No. 37-2015-00008775-CU-CO-NC

Judge: Earl H. Maas, III

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ST. LOUIS CITY, MISSOURI

MONICA SABATINO

and

MICHAEL SABATINO,

Individually and on behalf of all others 

Similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

HMO MISSOURI, INC,

and

HEALTHY ALLIANCE LIFE

INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants.

Case No. 1522-CV00367-01

Judge: Bryan Hettenbach

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 380-1 Filed 11/18/15 Page 1 of 11 Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 462 Filed 02/04/16 Page 1 of 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

2

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

A Multidistrict Proceeding (the “MDL”) is pending in the Northern District of California 

involving over 100 federal district court cases transferred from numerous jurisdictions. The subject 

matter of the MDL is the Anthem data security breach announced by Anthem on or around February 

5, 2015 (“the Anthem Data Breach”).

Co-Lead Plaintiffs’ Counsel have been appointed in the MDL and a Consolidated Amended 

Complaint (the “CAC”) was filed on October 19, 2015 on behalf of 53 state-wide classes. The CAC 

names as defendants, Anthem, Inc., the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, numerous Anthem 

affiliates and various non-Anthem independent Blue Cross Blue Shield licensee insurance and health 

benefit companies. Pursuant to the September 11, 2015 MDL Court’s order, discovery in the MDL 

is proceeding.

There are three cases related to the Anthem Data Breach pending in state courts. Those cases 

are: Smilow v. Anthem, Case No. 57271 (Los Angeles Superior Court); Wickens v. Blue Cross of 

California, Case No. 37-2015-00008775 (San Diego Superior Court); and Sabatino v. HMO 

Missouri, Case No. 1522-CV00367-01 (St. Louis Cir. Ct.) (the “Coordinated State Cases”). The 

Plaintiff in Smilow filed a Request for Dismissal on November 9, 2015, and accordingly, once that 

case is dismissed, there will be no need for coordination of that action at this time. The Coordinated 

State Cases are class actions brought against several Anthem affiliates.1

It is also possible that in the future there will be other cases related to the Anthem Data 

Breach pending in other state courts. To the extent there are, the parties to the MDL will request 

those cases to be incorporated into this Order. 

A federal multidistrict court cannot bind the state courts in parallel proceedings, and the state 

courts cannot bind the federal court. No court that signs this Order intends to violate that principle. 

But if the multidistrict court and a given state court simultaneously enter an order, they can 

 

1 Two related cases have also been filed in Washington state court: Mertlich v. Anthem, Case 

No. 15-2-24745-0-SEA (Wash. Super. Ct. Kings Cnty.), and Kaufman v. Amerigroup Washington, 

Inc., Case No. 15-2-24744-1-SEA (Wash. Super. Ct. Kings Cnty.). Anthem removed Mertlich on 

November 13, 2015. Anthem is evaluating whether there are grounds to remove Kaufman. To the 

extent either case proceeds in state Court, the parties in the MDL will request the state case be 

incorporated into this Order.

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 380-1 Filed 11/18/15 Page 2 of 11 Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 462 Filed 02/04/16 Page 2 of 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

3

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

collectively and effectively direct the parties and counsel before them to coordinate. Other state 

courts then can sign on, as and when they choose to. Some state courts may decide to go forward on 

their own, regardless of the progress of the Multidistrict Proceeding. Some state courts may, solely 

within their discretion, choose to stay their actions pending the outcome of the Multidistrict 

Proceeding. But some may join the Coordination Order to achieve maximum coordination so as to 

serve the interests of judicial economy and reduction of attorney fees and costs for many of the 

cases. It is in that spirit that this order is entered.

Accordingly, Judge Koh of the Northern District of California (the Multidistrict Court), 

Judge Maas of the California Superior Court (San Diego), and Judge Hettenbach of the Circuit Court 

of St. Louis, Missouri having consulted by telephone and e-mail concerning the terms of the 

proposed order, do hereby enter this Order for their respective cases and their respective 

jurisdictions.

I. DEFINITIONS

1. The “Multidistrict Proceeding” or “MDL” shall mean 15-md-02617-LHK, In re 

Anthem, Inc., Data Breach Litigation, Northern District of California.

2. The “Multidistrict Court” shall mean Judge Lucy H. Koh and Magistrate Judge 

Nathanael Cousins of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

3. “State Court Action” shall mean any state court lawsuit involving the same subject 

matter as the Multidistrict Proceeding, i.e., the Anthem Data Breach.

4. “Coordinated State Court Actions” shall mean the Wickens and Sabatino actions 

noted above and any other State Court Action that subsequently enters this Order.

5. The “MDL Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel” shall mean Eve Cervantez of Altshuler 

Berzon LLP and Andrew N. Friedman of Cohen, Milstein, Sellers & Toll PLLC.

6. “MDL Defendants’ Liaison Counsel” shall mean Craig A. Hoover of Hogan Lovells, 

LLP.

7. “State Court Liaison Counsel” shall mean the person(s) or law firm(s) representing 

plaintiffs selected by a judge in each State Court Action to fulfill the duties described in this Order.

8. “Coordinating Counsel” shall mean, collectively, the MDL Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead 

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 380-1 Filed 11/18/15 Page 3 of 11 Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 462 Filed 02/04/16 Page 3 of 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

4

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

Counsel, the MDL Defendants’ Liaison Counsel and all State Court Liaison Counsel.

9. “Anthem Defendants” shall mean Anthem, Inc. and its subsidiaries named as

Defendants in the MDL or State Court Action. 

10. Anthem-Related Witnesses shall mean employees, former employees, and agents of 

Anthem, Inc. and its subsidiaries.

II. OPERATIVE TERMS

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the parties are to work together to coordinate 

discovery in order to prevent duplication of effort and to promote the efficient and speedy resolution 

of the MDL Proceeding and the Coordinated Actions and, to that end, the following procedures for 

discovery and pretrial proceedings shall be adopted:

A. Discovery and Pretrial Scheduling

11. To the extent possible, discovery and discovery-related pretrial scheduling in the 

Coordinated State Court Actions will be coordinated with the discovery and discovery-related 

pretrial scheduling in the MDL Proceeding. 

12. Parties in the Coordinated State Court Actions and their counsel shall be entitled to 

participate in discovery in the MDL Proceeding as set forth in this Order and in accordance with the 

terms of the Stipulated Protective Order entered in the MDL Proceeding (the “MDL Protective 

Order”), attached as Exhibit A hereto. Parties in the MDL Proceeding and their counsel shall be 

entitled to participate in discovery in any Coordinated State Court Action as set forth in this Order.

13. While the MDL Protective Order will govern the MDL Proceeding and Coordinated 

State Court Actions, if any Court enters or has entered further restrictions, those further restrictions 

shall apply only to the action before that court, and shall not bind the parties in proceedings in the 

MDL Proceeding or in proceedings in other Coordinated State Court Actions.

B. Use of Discovery Obtained in the MDL Proceeding or the Coordinated State 

Court Actions

14. Counsel representing a party in a Coordinated State Court Action will be entitled to 

receive all discovery taken in the MDL Proceeding of Anthem Defendants and Anthem-related

witnesses, provided that such discovery responses and documents shall be used or disseminated in 

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 380-1 Filed 11/18/15 Page 4 of 11 Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 462 Filed 02/04/16 Page 4 of 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

5

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

accordance with the terms of the MDL Protective Order. Counsel representing a party in the MDL 

Proceeding shall be entitled to receive all discovery taken of Anthem Defendants and Anthemrelated witnesses in any Coordinated State Court Action; any such discovery responses and 

documents shall be used or disseminated in accordance with the terms of the MDL Protective Order.

15. Requests for documents, interrogatories, depositions on written questions and 

requests for admission propounded in the MDL Proceeding to Anthem Defendants and Anthemrelated witnesses will be deemed to have been propounded and served in the Coordinated State 

Court Actions. Requests for documents, interrogatories, depositions on written questions and 

requests for admission propounded to Anthem Defendants and Anthem-related witnesses in the 

Coordinated State Court Actions will be deemed to have been propounded and served in the MDL 

Proceeding. Responses to such requests for documents, interrogatories, depositions on written 

questions and requests for admission will be deemed to be made in any of these actions and may be 

used in any of these actions, subject to and in accordance with the terms of the MDL Protective 

Order, as if they had been taken under the applicable civil discovery rules of the respective 

jurisdiction.

16. Depositions of Anthem Defendants and Anthem-related witnesses taken in the MDL 

Proceeding may be used in the Coordinated State Court Actions, subject to and in accordance with 

the terms of the MDL Protective Order, as if they had been taken under the applicable civil 

discovery rules of the respective jurisdictions. Depositions taken in the Coordinated State Court 

Actions may be used in the MDL Proceeding, subject to and in accordance with the terms of the 

MDL Protective Order, as if they had been taken under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 

applicable discovery rules of the Northern District of California.

C. Service and Coordination Among Counsel

17. The MDL Court has previously appointed Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel in the MDL 

Proceeding (the “MDL Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel”). 

a) MDL Defendants’ Liaison Counsel shall serve upon each Coordinating Counsel copies of 

all of the following documents -- to the extent they were issued or served prior to the 

entry of this Order --: all Scheduling Orders, Case Management Orders, Coordination

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 380-1 Filed 11/18/15 Page 5 of 11 Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 462 Filed 02/04/16 Page 5 of 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

6

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

Orders, Confidentiality or Protective Orders, discovery requests (including requests for 

documents, interrogatories, depositions on written questions, requests for admission and 

subpoenas duces tecum), responses and objections to discovery requests; deposition 

notices; correspondence or other papers modifying discovery requests or schedules; and 

discovery motions (i.e., motions under Rules 26 through 37 or Rule 45 of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure) or requests for hearing on discovery disputes regarding 

coordinated discovery matters that are entered in their respective actions. Service may be 

made by electronic means. Coordinating Counsel shall be responsible for distributing 

such documents to other counsel for their respective actions.

b) MDL Defendants’ Liaison Counsel shall serve upon each Coordinating Counsel copies of 

all of the following documents – to the extent they are issued subsequent to the entry of 

this Order – all Scheduling Orders, Case Management Orders, Coordination Orders, 

Confidentiality or Protective Orders. Service may be made by electronic means. 

Coordinating Counsel shall be responsible for distributing such documents to other 

counsel for their respective actions.

c) MDL Defendants’ Liaison Counsel shall file with the MDL copies of all Scheduling 

Orders, Case Management Orders, Confidentiality or Protective Orders that are entered in 

any Coordinated State Court Action.

d) Subsequent to the date of entry of this Order, Coordinating Counsel shall serve upon each 

Coordinating Counsel discovery of Anthem Defendants including: copies of discovery 

requests (including requests for documents, interrogatories, depositions on written 

questions, requests for admission and subpoenas duces tecum), responses and objections 

to discovery requests; deposition notices; correspondence or other papers modifying 

discovery requests or schedules; and discovery motions (i.e., motions under Rules 26 

through 37 or Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) or requests for hearing on 

discovery disputes regarding coordinated discovery matters that are entered in their 

respective actions. Service may be made by electronic means. Coordinating Counsel 

shall be responsible for distributing such documents to other counsel for their respective 

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 380-1 Filed 11/18/15 Page 6 of 11 Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 462 Filed 02/04/16 Page 6 of 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

7

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

actions.

18. Any court wishing to grant the parties before it access to coordinated discovery may 

do so by joining this Order pursuant to paragraph 31, below, and appointing a State Court Liaison 

Counsel in that State Court to facilitate coordination of discovery in the Coordinated Action and 

discovery in the MDL Proceeding.

19. MDL Defendants’ Liaison Counsel shall maintain a log of all Orders entered in the 

MDL Proceeding or any Coordinated State Court Action and all discovery requests and responses 

sent and received in the MDL Proceeding or any Coordinated State Court Action and shall transmit a 

copy of said log by electronic means to the MDL Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel and each State Court 

Liaison Counsel by the seventh (7th) day of each month, or upon written request. The MDL 

Defendants’ Liaison Counsel will promptly transmit a copy of each order entered in the MDL 

Proceeding to State Court Liaison Counsel in the Coordinated State Court Actions. MDL 

Defendants’ Liaison Counsel will promptly transmit a copy of each order entered in any Coordinated 

State Court Action to the MDL Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel.

D. Participation in Depositions

20. Each deposition taken in the MDL Proceeding and Coordinated State Court Actions 

will be conducted on reasonable written notice, to be served, electronically or otherwise, on all 

Coordinating Counsel.

21. Plaintiffs in the MDL Proceeding and Coordinated State Court Actions shall 

coordinate with one another in noticing depositions so that all depositions shall be jointly scheduled, 

noticed and conducted. MDL Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel, or their designee, shall confer with State 

Court Liaison Counsel in the Coordinated State Court Actions, or their designees, in advance of each 

deposition noticed, taking such steps as may be necessary to prevent multiple interrogators and avoid 

duplicative questions, and to avoid duplicative depositions in the Coordinated State Court Actions, 

including the appointment of a single lead questioner for all plaintiffs in the MDL Proceeding and all 

plaintiffs in all Coordinated State Court Actions (“Plaintiffs’ Lead Questioner”). Coordinating 

Counsel will select a Lead Questioner before each deposition. To the extent they cannot agree, they 

will seek direction from the Court where the deposition was noticed. 

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 380-1 Filed 11/18/15 Page 7 of 11 Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 462 Filed 02/04/16 Page 7 of 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

8

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

22. Counsel representing a party in the MDL Proceeding and Coordinated State Court 

Action shall be permitted to attend any deposition of Anthem Defendants and Anthem-related 

witnesses scheduled in the MDL Proceeding or Coordinated State Court Actions. One Plaintiffs’ 

Counsel from each Coordinated State Court Action and one counsel for the MDL Plaintiffs shall be 

permitted a reasonable amount of time to question the deponent in those depositions following 

questioning by the Plaintiffs’ Lead Questioner. Questions asked by counsel shall not be duplicative 

of questions previously asked in the deposition. Each such counsel shall be permitted to make 

objections during examination by other counsel, in accordance with the statues, rules, and orders 

governing the parties represented by counsel.

(a) Participation of counsel from the MDL Proceeding and Coordinated State Court Actions 

shall be arranged so as not to delay discovery or other proceedings as scheduled in the 

MDL Proceeding and Coordinated State Court Actions.

23. Counsel representing any party to the MDL Proceeding or any Coordinated State 

Court Action may obtain directly from the court reporter at counsel’s own expense a transcript of 

any deposition of Anthem Defendants and Anthem-related witnesses taken in the MDL Proceeding 

or Coordinated State Court Action. The transcript of any deposition taken shall not be used or 

disseminated in violation of the terms of this Order and the MDL Protective Order, or applicable law 

in a coordinated proceeding.

24. Depositions of Anthem Defendants and Anthem-related witnesses noticed in the 

MDL Proceeding and Coordinated State Court Actions shall be deemed to have been noticed in both 

the MDL Proceeding and the Coordinated State Court Actions.

25. Counsel and parties in either the MDL Proceeding or any Coordinated State Court 

Action who do not attend a jointly noticed deposition are prohibited from re-taking that deposition 

except for good cause shown.

26. Defendants (directly or through counsel for plaintiffs in the MDL Proceeding for any 

Coordinated State Court Action) may invite plaintiffs in parallel state cases in which coordination 

orders have not been entered (“Non-coordinated Actions”) to attend depositions of Anthem 

Defendants and Anthem-related witnesses jointly noticed under this Order. Counsel for plaintiffs in 

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 380-1 Filed 11/18/15 Page 8 of 11 Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 462 Filed 02/04/16 Page 8 of 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

9

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

Non-coordinated Actions may examine the witness after the MDL Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel (or 

their designee) and Coordinated State Court Actions have completed their examinations. The 

unwillingness of one or more plaintiffs in Non-coordinated actions to participate in a deposition shall 

not be grounds for rescheduling the deposition. MDL Defendants’ Liaison Counsel shall provide the 

MDL Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel and the State Court Liaison Counsel in the Coordinated State 

Court Actions written notice of any person who has been extended an invitation at least five day in 

advance of the deposition.

27. If MDL Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel, MDL Defendants’ Liaison Counsel and the 

State Court Liaison Counsel have received notice of a deposition of Anthem Defendants and 

Anthem-related witnesses in either the MDL Proceeding or any Coordinated State Court Action, 

such deposition may be used in the MDL Proceeding and each Coordinated State Court Action for 

all purposes permitted under the Rules of Civil Procedure governing the action in which it is to be 

used without regard to whether any of the Coordinating Counsel attend or cross examine at the 

noticed deposition.

E. Written Discovery 

28. MDL Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel (or their designee) shall confer with the State 

Court Liaison Counsel in the Coordinated State Court Actions, or their designees, in advance of the 

service of requests for written discovery in either the MDL Proceeding or in any Coordinated State 

Court Action, taking such steps as may be necessary to serve joint written discovery, and to prevent 

additional duplicative interrogatories, deposition on written questions, requests for admission and 

requests for documents in either the MDL Proceeding or the Coordinated State Court Actions.

29. All parties to the MDL Proceeding and the Coordinated State Court Actions, through 

their respective Coordinating Counsel, shall be entitled to receive copies of responses to 

interrogatories, responses to depositions on written questions, responses to requests for admission 

and documents produced by Anthem Defendants and Anthem-related witnesses in either the MDL 

Proceeding or in any Coordinated State Court Action. This does not alleviate either party’s 

obligation to comply with any state or local requirements governing production of documents in the 

State Court Actions. Any party or counsel otherwise entitled under this order to receive copies of 

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 380-1 Filed 11/18/15 Page 9 of 11 Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 462 Filed 02/04/16 Page 9 of 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

10

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

discovery shall use such materials only in accordance with the terms of the MDL Protective Order.

30. Counsel for Plaintiffs in the MDL Proceeding and Coordinated State Court Actions 

shall meet and confer regarding the establishment of a joint document depository, including joint 

maintenance of physical or electronic files and the equitable sharing of expenses.

F. Discovery Dispute Resolution

31. In the event that the parties are not able to resolve any disputes that may arise in the 

coordinated pretrial discovery, such disputes will be decided in the court governing the proceeding 

where the discovery was served, and in accordance with the rules of procedure governing that court. 

However if the dispute relates to overlapping discovery that pertains to both a) any of the 

Coordinated State Court Actions and b) the MDL Proceeding, then such dispute will be presented to 

the MDL Court only. 

32. Nothing contained herein shall constitute or be deemed a waiver of any objection of 

any defendant or plaintiff to the admissibility at trial of any documents, deposition testimony or 

exhibits, or written discovery responses provided or obtained in accordance with the Order, whether 

on grounds of relevance, materiality or any other basis, and all such objections are specifically 

preserved. The admissibility into evidence in any Coordinated State Court Action of any material 

provided or obtained in accordance with this Order shall be determined by the Court in which such 

action is pending.

G. Implementing This Order

33. Any court before which a State Court Action is pending may join this Order, thereby 

authorizing the parties to that State Court Action to participate in coordinated discovery as and to the 

extent authorized in this Order, provided that State Court Liaison Counsel is first appointed for the 

State Court Action.

34. Each court that joins this Order shall retain jurisdiction to modify, rescind and/or 

enforce the terms of this Order as it affects proceedings before that particular court.

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 380-1 Filed 11/18/15 Page 10 of 11 Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 462 Filed 02/04/16 Page 10 of 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

11

JOINT COORDINATION ORDER

Case No: 15-MD-02617-LHK (NC)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: , 2015

Lucy H. Koh

United States District Judge

Northern District of California

Dated: , 2015

Judge Bryan Hettenbach

Trial Judge

Circuit Court of St. Louis County

Missouri

Dated: , 2015

Earl H. Maas, III

Superior Court Judge

San Diego Superior Court

California

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 380-1 Filed 11/18/15 Page 11 of 11

February February 44, 2016

Case 5:15-md-02617-LHK Document 462 Filed 02/04/16 Page 11 of 11