1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

IN RE: TIKTOK, INC. CONSUMER 

PRIVACY LITIGATION 

MDL No. 2948 

Master Docket No. 20 C 4699 

District Judge John Z. Lee 

Magistrate Judge Sunil R. Harjani 

This Document Relates to All Cases 

APPLICATION OF MARK C. MOLUMPHY AND ALBERT Y. CHANG FOR 

APPOINTMENT TO PLAINTIFFS’ STEERING COMMITTEE; 

NOMINATION OF LEAD COUNSEL 

 

I. INTRODUCTION 

Pursuant to this Court’s Case Management Orders (“CMO”) Nos. 1 and 2 [ECF Nos. 4, 

24], counsel for Plaintiff A.J., through her guardian, Aaron Johnson, respectfully move the Court 

to: 

 appoint Katrina Carroll (“Carroll”) of Carlson Lynch, LLP (“Carlson Lynch”) and 

Jonathan Jagher (“Jagher”) of Freed Kanner London & Millen LLC (“Freed Kanner”) 

to serve as Co-Lead Counsel; and 

 appoint Mark Molumphy (“Molumphy”) of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, LLP 

(“CPM”) and Albert Chang (“Chang”) of Bottini & Bottini, Inc. (“Bottini”) as 

members of Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee. 

There are many experienced attorneys in this case. Inevitably, with such diverse 

experience, there will be different approaches on how to best represent the Class. Thus, it is 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 35 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:480
2 

imperative that Co-Lead Counsel not only have the knowledge, experience, and resources to take 

on TikTok, but also the leadership skills to work with, and consider the viewpoints of, other 

plaintiffs and their counsel regardless of where they originally filed their cases. For these reasons, 

Plaintiff A.J. – who originally filed her case in the Northern District of California – strongly 

supports Carroll and Jagher as Co-Lead Counsel. Carroll and Jagher alone have demonstrated the 

experience to lead this case and the willingness to consider other perspectives. If selected, they 

will best represent the Class going forward. 

Similarly, the Steering Committee should have independent membership to represent the 

views of all Class members and their counsel. Molumphy and Chang will provide a unique and 

independent perspective on Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee (in addition to their substantial 

experience litigating complex cases against China-based corporations). Unlike the other 

applicants, Molumphy and Chang were not a part of the Settling Plaintiffs’ mediation process 

resulting in the proposed settlement (coordinated by one of the two Co-Lead Counsel applicants), 

nor were they part of the “N.D.Cal. Interim Leadership Group” which previously moved to 

intervene and dismiss actions filed in Illinois federal districts and now seeks to litigate this case 

here (coordinated by the other Co-Lead Counsel applicant). Thus, Molumphy and Chang are not 

beholden to either group and will provide this Court, and the Class, with experienced and 

independent representation on the Steering Committee. 

II. KATRINA CARROLL AND JONATHAN JAGHER SHOULD BE APPOINTED 

TO SERVE AS CO-LEAD COUNSEL 

 

Carroll and Jagher should be appointed as Co-Lead Counsel to represent the proposed 

Class. Both have extensive experience litigating the claims at issue and the ability to work with 

other counsel, including those with different points of view or who filed in different districts. 

 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 35 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 2 of 8 PageID #:481
3 

Indeed, even before the cases were consolidated by the JPML, Carroll and Jagher alone 

sought out the views of Plaintiff A.J.’s counsel, Molumphy and Chang, and considered their input 

about the direction of the case. This was true even though, at the time, Molumphy and Chang were 

pursuing their client’s case in the Northern District of California, where TikTok is headquartered. 

After the cases were consolidated and transferred to this District by the JPML, Carroll and Jagher 

continued to coordinate with other planitiffs’ counsel, including in matters relating to case 

management and compliance with meet and confer requirements set by this Court in CMO Nos. 1 

and 2. Based on these first-hand experiences, Molumphy and Chang believe Carroll and Jagher 

are the best choice to serve as Co-Lead counsel in this case. 

III. MOLUMPHY AND CHANG ARE EXPERIENCED COUNSEL AND WILL

PROVIDE A UNIQUE, INDEPENDENT PERSPECTIVE TO PLAINTIFFS’ 

STEERING COMMITTEE 

A. Molumphy and Chang Have Vast Experience Handling Complex Privacy 

Cases, Including Class Actions Against China-Based Companies 

Mark C. Molumphy is a Partner at CPM, based in Burlingame, California, in close 

proximity to TikTok’s headquarters in San Jose, California (as well as to TikTok’s counsel, 

Wilson Sonsini, based in Palo Alto, California). Molumphy has been practicing for nearly three 

decades, chairs CPM’s consumer protection and privacy practices, and has substantial privacy 

and class action experience. Molumphy has had a leadership role in many of the nation’s most 

prominent privacy and data breach cases, including In re Apple Inc. Device Performance 

Litigation, No. 18-md-02827-EJD (N.D. Cal.), a multi-district class action against Apple alleging 

violations of state and federal computer intrusion statutes, which recently settled for payment of 

$310-$500 million to Apple iPhone customers. Molumphy served as co-lead counsel with Bottini 

in the In re Yahoo! Shareholder Litigation, No. 17-cv-307054 (Santa Clara Sup. Ct.), alleging

both direct and derivative claims following Yahoo!’s disclosure of two of the largest data 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 35 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 3 of 8 PageID #:482
4 

breaches in history impacting one billion users. Molumphy won permission to take expedited 

discovery, personally deposed Yahoo!’s Chief Information Security Officer, and obtained a 

settlement including both injunctive relief and a $29 million payment. Currently, Molumphy 

serves as co-lead counsel in the Zoom privacy class action, In Re: Zoom Video Communications, 

Inc. Privacy Litigation, No. 20-cv-02155-LHK (N.D. Cal.), alleging that Zoom obtained and 

shared private information without consent, similar to claims asserted here. CPM also has 

substantial experience in this district and currently serves as lead counsel for the Commercial & 

Institutional Indirect Purchaser Plaintiff class in In re Broilers Antitrust Litigation, No. 1:16-cv08637 (N.D. Ill.) and on Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee in In re Ethiopian Airlines Flight ET 

302 Crash, No. 1:19-cv-02170 (N.D. Ill.). Molumphy’s CV is attached as Exhibit 1 to the 

Declaration of Mark C. Molumphy filed in support of this Application and Nomination. 

Albert Y. Chang, who is fluent in Chinese, has nearly two decades of experience 

representing consumers and shareholders in high-stakes litigation involving technology 

companies, such as Facebook, Inc. and Yahoo! Inc. In a nationwide class action against the 

China-based tech giant, Alibaba Group Holding, Ltd., Chang took depositions of Alibaba 

employees in Hong Kong and managed the multi-lingual review of millions of pages of 

documents. In 2019, after extensive discovery, Alibaba paid $75 million to settle the case. Chang 

is currently representing a proposed class of consumers in the Northern District of California, 

alleging BIPA violations against Facebook. Zellmer v. Facebook, Inc., No. 18-cv-1880-JD (N.D. 

Cal.) and Gullen v. Facebook, Inc., No. 16-cv-0937-JD (N.D. Cal.). In this hard-fought litigation 

going into its fifth year, Chang has litigated cutting-edge, complex issues, including Article III 

standing, in both the district court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. A former judicial law 

clerk to the Honorable Suzanne B. Conlon, Chang regularly litigates in this District and the 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 35 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 4 of 8 PageID #:483
5 

Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. In 2014, for example, Chang successfully litigated a 

shareholder derivative action in this District, In re Career Education Shareholder Derivative 

Litigation, No. 11 C 9119 (N.D. Ill.), which recovered $20 million for the company. Chang’s 

CV is attached as Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Albert Y. Chang filed in support of this 

Application and Nomination. 

Based on their extensive experience in similar cases, their ability to work with others 

entrusted with leadership responsibilities, their unique litigation experience with China-based 

companies, and CPM’s geographic proximity to TikTok and its counsel in Northern California, 

Molumphy and Chang are well qualified to serve on the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee.

B. Molumphy and Chang Sought to Work Cooperatively with the Attorneys in 

This Case 

Molumphy and Chang have experience working on large class actions, involving 

numerous plaintiffs’ attorneys, which will allow them to manage issues that are pivotal to the 

success of this case. Molumphy and Chang also have a professional reputation as lawyers who 

prioritize collegiality and work with civility, respect, and candor towards their co-counsel, as 

well as the Court and defense counsel. 

From the beginning of this case, Molumphy and Chang prioritized coordination with other 

counsel to advance the class interests, rather than confrontation or taking antagonistic positions. 

Molumphy and Chang were the first California counsel to coordinate with plaintiffs who filed 

cases in Illinois. Indeed, both prior to and after the MDL hearing, Molumphy and Chang spoke 

with Carroll, in her capacity as then-Interim Lead Counsel appointed by this Court, to discuss 

their respective cases and strategies to best represent the plaintiffs. 

Other firms decided to take a different approach, resisting coordination with other 

plaintiffs (unless they signed on with their litigation strategy) and, in certain cases, unilaterally 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 35 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 5 of 8 PageID #:484
6 

acting in ways that arguably prejudiced plaintiffs who filed in other districts. See e.g., July 13, 

2020 Order in E.R. v. TikTok, Inc., No. 1:20-cv-02810 (N.D. Ill.), CM/ECF Dkt. No. 46 (denying 

motion to intervene and finding “that intervention would prejudice the existing Plaintiffs”), and 

July 1, 2020 Memorandum and Order in A.S. v. TikTok, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-00457 (S.D. Ill.), 

CM/ECF Dkt. No. 3 (denying motion to intervene and finding that “intervention and 

consideration of the proposed motions as likely to prejudice the rights of the original parties.”). 

Despite these contrasting approaches, all plaintiffs appear to agree that Plaintiffs’ Steering 

Committee should not only provide support for Co-Lead Counsel, but offer independent 

perspectives on important strategy decisions. Uniquely situated, Molumphy and Chang were not 

parties to the contentious intervention motions filed by one set of proposed Co-Lead Counsel, 

nor did they participate in the mediation led by the other proposed Co-Lead Counsel. Rather, 

they offer a fresh and independent perspective to this case, and as Steering Committee members 

will help ensure that the best interests of all Class members are protected in this case. 

C. Molumphy and Chang are Willing and Able to Commit All Necessary 

Resources to this Case 

Plaintiffs face a well-financed defendant, represented by highly capable counsel. The 

proposed class needs equally qualified and committed representation. Molumphy and Chang are 

committed to this case and their firms have the resources necessary to support that commitment. 

Molumphy and Chang, and their firms, have long track records litigating complex cases for as 

long as it takes, including trial and appeal. See, e.g., In People of the State of California v. 

Atlantic Richfield, et al., No. 1-00-CV-788657 (Santa Clara Super. Ct.) (CPM represented 

California cities and counties in a public nuisance action against lead paint manufacturers 

involving conduct dating back half a century; after over a decade of litigation, CPM prevailed at 

trial and obtained a $1.15 billion judgment); In re Career Education Shareholder Derivative 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 35 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 6 of 8 PageID #:485
7 

Litigation, No. 11 C 9119 (N.D. Ill.) (Bottini prevailed in nearly five-year-long derivative lawsuit 

involving securities fraud). 

IV. CONCLUSION 

For the reasons stated herein, the Court should appoint Katrina Carroll and Jonathan Jagher 

as Co-Lead Counsel, and appoint Mark Molumphy and Albert Chang as members of Plaintiffs’ 

Steering Committee. 

Dated: September 8, 2020 

 

/s/ Mark C. Molumphy 

MARK C. MOLUMPHY 

COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY LLP 

840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200 

Burlingame, CA 94010 

Telephone: 650.697.6000 

Facsimile: 650.697.0577 

mmolumphy@cpmlegal.com

/s/ Albert Y. Chang 

Albert Y. Chang 

BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC. 

7817 Ivanhoe Avenue, Suite 102 

La Jolla, CA 92037 

Telephone: (858) 914-2001 

achang@bottinilaw.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff A.J., through her guardian, Aaron Johnson 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 35 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 7 of 8 PageID #:486
8 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I, Albert Y. Chang, affirm that the foregoing was filed on September 8, 2020 via 

CM/ECF, which automatically served all counsel of record. 

Dated: September 8, 2020 /s/ Albert Y. Chang

Albert Y. Chang 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 35 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 8 of 8 PageID #:487