IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILILNOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

IN RE: TIKTOK, INC., 

CONSUMER PRIVACY 

LITIGATION 

This Documents Relates to All Cases 

MDL No. 2948 

Master Docket No. 20-cv-4699 

Judge John Z. Lee 

Magistrate Jude Sunil R. Harjani 

APPLICATION OF JOSEPH P. GUGLIELMO FOR APPOINTMENT TO PLAINTIFFS’ 

STEERING COMMITTEE AND IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSED CO-LEAD COUNSEL 

AND LIAISON COUNSEL PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 23(g) 

Pursuant to Rule 23(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Court’s Case 

Management Orders Nos. 1 (“CMO 1”) and 2 (“CMO 2”), Plaintiff G.R. by and through her 

Guardian Mayra De La Cruz (“Plaintiff”), submits this memorandum in support of the application 

for Joseph P. Guglielmo of Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP (“Scott+Scott”) to Plaintiffs’ 

Steering Committee, and the applications of Katrina Carroll of Carlson Lynch LLP (“Carlson 

Lynch”) and Jonathan Jagher of Freed Kanner London & Millen LLC (“Freed Kanner”) as CoLead Counsel, and Elizabeth Fegan of Fegan Scott, LLC as Plaintiffs’ Liaison Counsel. 

INTRODUCTION 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g)(3) provides that the Court “may designate interim 

counsel to act on behalf of the putative class before determining whether to certify the action as 

a class action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(3). Furthermore, the MANUAL FOR COMPLEX LITIGATION

(the “Manual”) provides guidance regarding the organization of complex litigation, including the 

responsibilities and duties of counsel appointed to lead such actions, the importance of the 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 31 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:305
2 

appointment of “designated” counsel and the various organizational structures. See MANUAL FOR 

COMPLEX LITIGATION (FOURTH) §§10.2, 10.21, 10.22, 10.221, and 10.224 (2004). As the Manual 

explains, “[e]arly organization of the counsel who have filed the various cases transferred or 

consolidated for pretrial purposes is a critical case-management task.” Id. §22.62. 

In appointing class counsel, the court “must consider”: 

(i) the work counsel has done in identifying or investigating potential 

claims in the action; 

(ii) counsel’s experience in handling class actions, other complex 

litigation, and the types of claims asserted in the action; 

(iii) counsel’s knowledge of the applicable law; and 

(iv) the resources that counsel will commit to representing the class. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(1)(A)(i-iv). These four factors also apply in the selection of interim

class counsel. Walker v. Discover Fin. Servs., No. 10-CV-6994, 2011 WL 2160889, at *2 (N.D. 

Ill. May 26, 2011); Newberg on Class Actions §3:85 (5th ed.). In addition, the Court may consider 

“ʻother matter[s] pertinent to counsel’s ability to fairly and adequately represent the interests of

the class.’” Smith v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 301 F.R.D. 284, 288 (N.D. Ill. 2014)1; Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 23(g)(1)(B). As set forth below, based on these factors, as well as those set forth by the 

Court in CMO 1, Plaintiff submits that Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher should be appointed Co-Lead 

Class Counsel. Plaintiff further submits that Mr. Guglielmo of Scott+Scott be appointed to 

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee2 as the proposed attorneys are best suited to represent the interests 

1 Unless otherwise indicated, citations are omitted and emphasis is added. 

2 Plaintiff further supports the proposal submitted by Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher of 

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee consisting of: Robert Foote (Foote, Mielke, Chavez & O’Neil, 

LLC); Michael Gervais (Susman Godfrey LLP); Joseph Guglielmo (Scott+Scott); Tina Wolfson 

(Ahdoot & Wolfson, PC); and James Zouras (Stephan Zouras, LLP). For the same reasons set 

forth herein, Plaintiff believes the proposed Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee will inclusively and 

efficiently serve the interests of the putative classes. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 31 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 2 of 9 PageID #:306
3 

of the class and will ensure the vigorous, effective, cooperative, and efficient prosecution of the 

actions. 

In CMO 1, the Court indicated that the main criteria for appointment as Lead Counsel 

would be: (a) counsel’s willingness and availability to commit to a time consuming project; (b) 

counsel’s ability to work cooperatively with others; and (c) counsel’s professional experience in 

this type of litigation . . . .” CMO 1 at 6-7. As discussed below, Mr. Guglielmo of Scott+Scott 

has demonstrated his willingness to commit to this action and expend the resources necessary to 

achieve the best result for Plaintiff and the Class. Mr. Guglielmo has vast experience in complex 

litigation, data privacy, and data security litigation. Mr. Guglielmo has a strong track record of 

cooperation with other attorneys and firms across the plaintiff’s bar, including many in this action. 

Mr. Guglielmo, along with other attorneys representing clients that had filed various claims against 

TikTok, Inc. (“TikTok”), agreed to participate in settlement discussions, which included a 

mediation held before Hon. Layn Phillips, which ultimately led to the settlement with TikTok. Mr. 

Guglielmo’s inclusion in the Steering Committee would provide added depth and experience and 

ensure that the best result possible is achieved for the class against TikTok. Mr. Guglielmo’s 

inclusion in the Steering Committee would also ensure that a strong voice for California claims 

and class members is represented in a leadership position. 

JOSEPH P. GUGLIELMO SHOULD BE APPOINTED TO PLAINTIFFS’ 

STEERING COMMITTEE 

A. Joseph Guglielmo Has the Experience and Dedication to Serve on the Steering 

Committee 

For over the past 20 years, Mr. Guglielmo has litigated in a leadership capacity numerous 

complex consumer class actions, including as lead counsel in several prominent multidistrict data 

breach and data privacy class actions. Mr. Guglielmo currently serves as co-lead counsel for the 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 31 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 3 of 9 PageID #:307
4 

financial institution plaintiffs in In re Equifax, Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 

1:17-md-02800 (N.D. Ga.), which recently settled on a nationwide basis. Mr. Guglielmo also 

currently serves in a leadership capacity in In re Google Assistant Privacy Litigation, No. 5:19-

cv-04286 (N.D. Cal.)., representing consumers alleging privacy violations whereby Google 

Assistant records and discloses their private, confidential communications without consent. Mr. 

Guglielmo is also counsel in Lopez v. Apple Inc. Case No.: 4:19-cv-04577-JSW (N.D. Cal.), 

representing consumers and their minor children alleging privacy violations by Apple through its 

Siri application. 

Mr. Guglielmo was appointed co-lead counsel in Forth v. Walgreen Co, Inc., No. 1:17-cv02246 (N.D. Ill.), in this District, representing consumers and third-party payers claiming 

overcharges for medically necessary prescription drugs. A complete overview of Mr. Guglielmo’s 

prior experience and successful results is available on his firm’s website.3

Mr. Guglielmo’s recent successes further demonstrate his experience and dedication for 

appointment to Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee. Mr. Guglielmo served as co-lead counsel in In re 

The Home Depot, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 1:14-md-02583 (N.D. Ga.) 

and negotiated a $27.25 million settlement on behalf of financial institutions nationwide. Mr. 

Guglielmo was one of the principal negotiators of a $50 million settlement on behalf of financial 

institutions involving the breach of personal and financial information in First Choice Federal 

Credit Union v. The Wendy’s Co., No. 2:16-cv-00506 (W.D. Pa.), and Mr. Guglielmo was 

appointed to the plaintiffs’ steering committee and helped secure a $59 million settlement in In re 

Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 0:14-md-02522 (D. Minn.). 

Notably, in approving a settlement involving a Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme, Justice Lowe of the 

3

See https://scott-scott.com/about-us/attorneys/joseph-p-guglielmo/. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 31 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 4 of 9 PageID #:308
5 

New York Supreme Court commended Scott+Scott and Mr. Guglielmo’s representation: 

“Scott+Scott has demonstrated a remarkable grasp and handling of the extraordinarily complex 

matters in this case. The extremely professional and thorough means by which NYU’s counsel has 

litigated this matter has not been overlooked by this Court.” New York Univ. v. Ariel Fund Ltd., 

No. 603803/08, slip. op. at 9-10 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Mar. 1, 2010). 

Through these cases, Mr. Guglielmo has worked extensively and cooperatively with almost 

all of the law firms representing plaintiffs against TikTok. Given Mr. Guglielmo’s strong prior 

track record of cooperation and experience with firms across the plaintiff’s bar, as well as his 

extensive knowledge of data breach and data privacy litigation, and the settlement of such actions, 

Mr. Guglielmo has brought, and will continue to bring, his depth of knowledge and experience to 

this action. Mr. Guglielmo, on behalf of the California client and Class he represents, researched, 

developed, and brought specific claims under California law against TikTok, including the 

California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”), Cal. Civil Code §1798.100 et seq., as well 

claims based on violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Cal. Bus. & Prof. 

Code §17200, based on unlawful and unfair conduct under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §22576, and 

Cal. Fam. Code §6701 and §6710. Mr. Guglielmo has also done extensive research into the factual 

claims, as well as research into the application development at issue. Mr. Guglielmo has dedicated 

substantial time and resources to the claims and has been a material participant in the mediation 

and ultimate settlement of the claims brought against TikTok. For these reasons, Plaintiff 

respectfully requests that the Court appoint Mr. Guglielmo to Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee.

KATRINA CARROLL AND JON JAGHER SHOULD BE APPOINTED CO-LEAD 

COUNSEL 

Mr. Guglielmo offers his full support for the applications of Katrina Carroll and Jon Jagher 

as Co-Lead Counsel. Having worked with them and their firms in previous complex consumer 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 31 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 5 of 9 PageID #:309
6 

class action litigation, and having seen their tremendous dedication and skill in the instant litigation 

in trying to bring about consensus among as many parties as possible towards a complete resolution 

of the class claims, Mr. Guglielmo is confident that Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher clearly meet the 

criteria warranting appointment as Co-Lead Counsel and have and will continue to work with all 

parties in a professional, constructive, and cooperative manner to achieve the best possible 

outcome for all members of the Class. 

Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher have already shown their willingness and availability to commit 

to this litigation, which has been a time consuming project, as well as their ability and willingness 

to work cooperatively with others by bringing together attorneys and clients with actions 

throughout the United States to work together to achieve a common goal of all plaintiffs’ counsel 

– to obtain the best possible outcome for their clients and the Class they seek to represent. 

Moreover, Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher have demonstrated in this action and in their respective firm 

resumes their professional experience in this type of litigation. 

Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher have dedicated a substantial number of hours towards the 

prosecution and litigation of this action. Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher have responded with a 

dedication to expend the resources necessary to reach a positive outcome. Substantively, this 

litigation presents complex and novel interpretations of still-developing consumer privacy rights 

statutes and caselaw, requiring many hours of legal research, analysis, synthesis, and writing. 

Procedurally, the matter has already been through extensive preliminary motion practice, including 

consolidation procedures at the district and multi-district levels, and two full-day mediation 

sessions. Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher have shown that they and their firms are more than willing 

to put in the necessary time and resources to fully litigate this matter to its conclusion. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 31 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 6 of 9 PageID #:310
7 

Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher have also shown their tireless efforts to forge consensus. As 

more fully described in their respective submissions and declarations, Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher 

have documented dozens of communications among all plaintiffs’ and defendants’ counsel 

regarding numerous issues of strategy, coordination, and settlement. Mr. Guglielmo fully expects 

this openness and desire to gain full consensus to the benefit of the putative classes to continue 

should they be appointed co-Lead Counsel. 

Finally, Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher have years of experience as top-class consumer class 

action litigators that they would bring to bear as co-leaders of the plaintiffs’ group in this litigation. 

Ms. Carroll has prior experience with biometric privacy litigation in particular, including BIPA 

cases against Google and Shutterfly. See, e.g., Norberg v. Shutterfly, Inc., 152 F. Supp. 3d 1103 

(N.D. Ill. 2015) (finding jurisdiction against defendant and that plaintiff stated a claim under the 

Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”)); Rivera v. Google Inc., 238 F. Supp. 3d 

1088, 1095-96 (N.D. Ill. 2017) (interpreting meaning of “biometric identifier” within the context 

of BIPA). 

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff submits that Mr. Guglielmo be appointed to Plaintiffs’ 

Steering Committee, that Ms. Carroll and Mr. Jagher be appointed co-Lead Counsel, and that Ms. 

Fegan should be appointed as Liaison Counsel. 

Dated: September 8, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 

SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP 

/s/ Joseph P. Guglielmo 

Joseph P. Guglielmo (IL Bar #2759819) 

The Helmsley Building 

230 Park Avenue, 17th Fl 

New York, NY 10169 

Telephone: 212-223-4478 

Facsimile: 212-223-6334 

jguglielmo@scott-scott.com 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 31 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 7 of 9 PageID #:311
8 

Erin Green Comite (IL Bar #420630) 

SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP 

156 South Main Street 

P.O. Box 192 

Colchester, CT 06415 

Telephone: 860-537-5537 

Facsimile: 860-537-4432 

ecomite@scott-scott.com 

Joseph A. Pettigrew 

SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP 

600 W. Broadway, Suite 3300 

San Diego, CA 92101 

Telephone: 860-537-5537 

Facsimile: 860-537-4432 

jpettigrew@scott-scott.com 

E. Kirk Wood 

ekirkwood1@bellsouth.net 

WOOD LAW FIRM, LLC 

P. O. Box 382434 

Birmingham, AL 35238-2434 

Telephone: 205-908-4906 

Facsimile: 866-747-3905 

William A. Baird 

w.baird.law@gmail.com 

BAIRD LAW FIRM 

2625 Townsgate Road, Suite 330 

Westlake Village, CA 91361 

Telephone: 805-267-1209 

Facsimile: 866-747-3905 

Counsel for Plaintiff G.R., a Minor, by and 

Through Her Guardian Mayra De La Cruz 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 31 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 8 of 9 PageID #:312
9 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 8th day of September, 2020, I electronically filed the foregoing 

with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will then send a notification of such 

filing to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing. 

s/ Joseph P. Guglielmo 

Joseph P. Guglielmo 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 31 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 9 of 9 PageID #:313