In Trauernicht v. Genworth Financial, Inc., 169 F.4th 459 (4th Cir. 2026), the Fourth Circuit delivered a significant win for defendants facing ERISA class actions. Reversing a district court’s certification order, the court held that claims under ERISA § 502(a)(2) seeking monetary relief for alleged fiduciary breaches in a defined contribution plan cannot be certified as a mandatory class under Rule 23(b)(1). The court also rejected the notion that ERISA fiduciary-duty claims “inherently” satisfy Rule 23’s commonality requirement.
Continue Reading One Plan, Many Accounts: Fourth Circuit Slams the Door on Mandatory ERISA Classes in Defined Contribution CasesFourth Circuit
Fourth Circuit Announces Legal Framework for Pre-Discovery Motions to Deny Class Certification
Although an uncommon step, defendants in putative class actions in some jurisdictions may move to deny class certification before discovery begins if the complaint’s proposed class is facially deficient. A successful motion forces plaintiffs to proceed individually, reducing a defendant’s exposure and eliminating costly discovery into issues of class certification. But district courts have yet to apply a consistent legal framework to those motions.
In Oliver v. Navy Fed. Credit Union, — F.4th —-, 2026 WL 346144 (4th Cir. Feb. 9, 2026), the Fourth Circuit provided such a framework, holding that “‘the appropriate procedure for a defendant to challenge class certification’—at the pleading stage or any other time—is to make ‘a motion to deny class certification under 23(c)(1)(A), coupled with a motion to strike under 23(d)(1)(D) should the motion to deny class certification be granted.’”.
Continue Reading Fourth Circuit Announces Legal Framework for Pre-Discovery Motions to Deny Class CertificationStanding in the Dark: Fourth Circuit Finds Standing for Driver’s License Information on the Dark Web
Courts continue to grapple with the type of “concrete harm” that is required to confer Article III standing under TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413 (2021), particularly in data breach and privacy class actions. On October 14, the Fourth Circuit contributed to this debate, holding that allegations that plaintiffs’ driver’s license data had been leaked and appeared on the dark web were sufficient to establish standing.
Holmes v. Elephant Ins. Co., — F.4th —, 2025 WL 2907615 (4th Cir. 2025), started with a 2022 data breach of Elephant Insurance Company’s networks. Id. at *1. Plaintiffs were Elephant customers whose driver’s license numbers were compromised in the breach. Id. They sued Elephant for alleged harms stemming from the breach. Id. at *3. Two plaintiffs specifically alleged that they had found their driver’s license numbers on the dark web; the others did not. Id. at *2. The district court dismissed plaintiffs’ claims, holding that none of the alleged injuries were sufficient to confer standing. Id. But the Fourth Circuit disagreed in part, reversing the lower court’s dismissal of the two plaintiffs who alleged that their driver’s license information appeared on the dark web, but affirming dismissal of the other two.
Continue Reading Standing in the Dark: Fourth Circuit Finds Standing for Driver’s License Information on the Dark WebFederal Court Fries Data Breach Class Action for Lack of Standing
A federal court in North Carolina dismissed a putative data breach class action against Bojangles because the plaintiffs failed to show that there was an actual or imminent misuse of their personal information as a result of the breach. Dougherty v. Bojangles’ Restaurants, Inc., 2025 WL 2810673 (W.D.N.C. Sept. 30, 2025).
Continue Reading Federal Court Fries Data Breach Class Action for Lack of StandingFourth Circuit Clarifies Standard for Rule 23’s Ascertainability and Predominance Requirements
The Fourth Circuit’s recent decision in Glover v. EQT Corporation, 2025 WL 2405514 (4th Cir. Aug. 20, 2025), provides clarity on what plaintiffs must do to certify a class in a breach-of-contract case while reaffirming that individualized fact-intensive inquiries make it difficult to certify fraudulent concealment claims as a class action.
Continue Reading Fourth Circuit Clarifies Standard for Rule 23’s Ascertainability and Predominance Requirements
Fourth Circuit Concludes TransUnion Demands Evidence of Injury for All Class Members
In TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, the Supreme Court held that “every class member must have Article III standing in order to recover individual damages.” 594 U.S. 413, 427, 431 (2021) (cleaned up). Post-TransUnion, courts have grappled with that guidance, especially as to whether a class that contains uninjured class members may permissibly be certified. As set forth in our recent post, the Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis to address a circuit split on that issue.
Continue Reading Fourth Circuit Concludes TransUnion Demands Evidence of Injury for All Class MembersA Closer Look: Fourth Circuit Upholds Unambiguous Delegation Clause post- Coinbase
Companies whose agreements with consumers contain an arbitration clause that delegates certain decisions to an arbitrator to resolve should be mindful of a recent Fourth Circuit decision clarifying what disputes may be resolved by a court and what disputes may be resolved by an arbitrator.
In Modern Perfection, LLC v. Bank of America, N.A., — F. 4th –, 2025 WL 77181 (4th Cir. 2025), plaintiffs entered into two contracts with a financial institution: a deposit agreement that contained an arbitration provision, and a promissory note related to a loan program that did not. Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the financial institution, and the institution sought to enforce its arbitration provision.
Continue Reading A Closer Look: Fourth Circuit Upholds Unambiguous Delegation Clause post- CoinbaseSouth Carolina Federal Court Denies Class Certification in Consumer Data Breach Case
A court in the District of South Carolina recently denied class certification in a putative consumer data breach class action after concluding that the proposed class and sub-classes were not ascertainable. See In re Blackbaud, Inc., Customer Data Breach Litigation, 2024 WL 21555221 (D.S.C. May 14, 2024).
In February 2022, plaintiffs filed suit against Blackbaud, a business-to-business software company that sells cloud-computing services to social good organizations. Plaintiffs, who had provided personal information to Blackbaud’s customers, alleged that their information was compromised during a breach of Blackbaud’s data centers. In December 2022, plaintiffs moved to certify nationwide and sub-classes representing individuals whose “unencrypted information was stored on the database” of a Blackbaud customer. In support of class certification, plaintiffs sought to demonstrate that the proposed classes were ascertainable by relying on (1) expert opinion, (2) Blackbaud’s discovery responses, (3) customer notices Blackbaud sent following the breach, and (4) Blackbaud’s use of a database to comply with the California Consumer Privacy Act. The court rejected each of those arguments.
Continue Reading South Carolina Federal Court Denies Class Certification in Consumer Data Breach CaseIn Rare Move, Fourth Circuit Exercises Pendent Jurisdiction Over Non-Final Order
In Elegant Massage, LLC v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 95 F.4th 181 (4th Cir. 2024), the Fourth Circuit took the unusual step of exercising interlocutory appellate jurisdiction over an order denying a motion to dismiss. Having granted a petition for interlocutory review under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f) of a class certification order, the court concluded that its review of the class order required it also to review the district court’s earlier denial of the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
Continue Reading In Rare Move, Fourth Circuit Exercises Pendent Jurisdiction Over Non-Final OrderFourth Circuit Holds That Consumer Class Action Release Does Not Necessarily Release Personal Injury Claims
The Fourth Circuit recently reinstated a wrongful death suit against a defendant, holding that the release in a settlement of consumer class actions against the defendant did not preclude plaintiff’s personal injury suit against that same defendant. See In re Lumber Liquidators Chinese-Manufactured Flooring Prod. Mktg., Sales Pracs. & Prod. Liab. Litig., — F. 4th —, 2024 WL 174363 (4th Cir. Jan. 17, 2024). The Fourth Circuit’s decision is notable given that class members—including plaintiff—explicitly agreed to release all personal injury claims against the defendant, yet the Fourth Circuit held that the plain language of the release was limited by the “identical factual predicate” doctrine and allowed the class member to raise this challenge in a subsequent lawsuit.
Continue Reading Fourth Circuit Holds That Consumer Class Action Release Does Not Necessarily Release Personal Injury Claims