Criterica Intelligence — production models trained on real court records, not synthetic data
Data Breach — MDL No. 3073

T-Mobile 2022

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri

The T-Mobile 2022 Customer Data Security Breach litigation was centralized before Judge Brian C. Wimes in the Western District of Missouri in June 2023, consolidating claims arising from a 2022 data security incident affecting T-Mobile customers. This is a distinct proceeding from an earlier T-Mobile breach MDL addressing a 2021 incident, which was resolved through a substantial negotiated settlement — the "2022" designation in this docket's caption specifically distinguishes it from that earlier, already-concluded litigation.

With 18 pending actions, this docket is comparatively modest in scale relative to some other telecommunications-sector breach dockets, which may reflect a smaller affected-customer population, a narrower scope of exposed data categories, or simply an earlier point in this specific docket's development relative to how large carrier-breach MDLs have grown historically. The core legal framework for telecommunications data-breach claims — standing, damages methodology, and typical settlement structures — is well established as a category given the volume of prior carrier-breach litigation, even though this docket's own factual record remains specific to the 2022 incident.

The existence of sequential, separately centralized MDLs for the same company's different breach events is a notable structural pattern worth tracking: it shows that a company's data-security litigation history is not necessarily resolved by settling one breach if subsequent incidents occur, and each new breach generates its own independent MDL and resolution timeline. Criterica Intelligence's platform tracks this kind of repeat-defendant, sequential-breach pattern across every active MDL, since a resolved prior matter does not predict how a new, separate incident will resolve. A companion capital brief on this docket is available through Criterica Capital.

Frequently Asked Questions
Why does the caption specify "2022" for this MDL?

To distinguish it from an earlier T-Mobile breach MDL addressing a separate 2021 data security incident, which was already resolved through its own negotiated settlement.

What does the pending-action count suggest about this docket?

At 18 pending actions, this is a comparatively modest telecommunications breach docket, which may reflect the scope of the affected population or exposed data categories, or simply this docket's current stage of development.

Is the legal framework for this claim well established?

Yes, as a category — standing, damages methodology, and typical settlement structures for telecommunications data-breach litigation are well developed given the volume of prior carrier-breach MDLs, even though this docket's specific facts are its own.

What does having sequential MDLs for the same company illustrate?

That resolving one data-breach matter does not immunize a company from new litigation if subsequent incidents occur — each breach generates its own independent MDL and resolution timeline, a pattern Criterica Intelligence tracks across repeat-defendant dockets.

Statistics shown reflect historical or illustrative model outputs derived from real case data. They are not predictions or guarantees of any individual outcome. Litigation results depend on facts, jurisdiction, judge, and counsel, and vary case by case. Model accuracy is subject to selection effects and changing legal dynamics.

← All Pending MDLsFunding brief on Criterica Capital →