Defending No-Injury Class Actions Post-Spokeo: Standing for Statutory Violations, State Court Litigation, and CAFA Removal

Recording of a 90-minute CLE webinar with Q&A

This program is included with the Strafford CLE Pass. Click for more information.
This program is included with the Strafford All-Access Pass. Click for more information.

Conducted on Thursday, April 27, 2017

Recorded event now available

or call 1-800-926-7926
Course Materials

This CLE course will discuss the impact of Spokeo on “no-injury” class action cases, primarily in consumer protection and data privacy cases, how challenges to Article III standing in federal court impact plaintiffs who try to shift such class actions into state court where different standing rules may apply. The program will discuss challenges for defendants in defending no-injury class actions in state court and navigating the impact of Spokeo on CAFA removal.


The Supreme Court’s Spokeo decision confirmed that the injury-in-fact requirements for Article III standing for class action plaintiffs require that the plaintiff suffered a concrete and particularized injury as opposed to a bare allegation that a consumer protection or privacy statute had been violated.

Since Spokeo, a few circuit courts have weighed in on this issue with somewhat conflicting results as to when Article III standing does, and does not, exist.

As no-injury cases are dismissed in federal court cases, plaintiffs now look to file these claims in state courts, venues not traditionally favorable to defendants. An unintended consequence of the Spokeo ruling may be its defeat of CAFA removal to federal court when defendants are faced with “no-injury” class actions filed in state court.

Listen as our authoritative panel examines the impact of Spokeo on Article III standing for no-injury class action claims, defending no-injury class actions in state court and navigating the impact of Spokeo on CAFA removal.



  1. Overview of Spokeo ruling
  2. Review of the potential impact of Spokeo on
  3. Circuit court cases addressing standing when a plaintiff files a claim alleging violation of a federal statute
  4. No-injury claims in state court
  5. Impact of Spokeo on CAFA removal


The panel will review these and other key issues:

  • How have the circuit courts interpreted what constitutes an injury post-Spokeo?
  • How have lower courts addressed the issue of standing when a plaintiff files a claim alleging a violation of a federal statute?
  • Has the Spokeo ruling rendered CAFA meaningless because the ruling deprives defendants of the ability to defend a “no-injury” class action in federal court?


Gavin J. Rooney
Gavin J. Rooney

Partner and Chair, Class Action Litigation Group
Lowenstein Sandler

Mr. Rooney specializes in class action and complex commercial litigation, representing corporate and institutional...  |  Read More

Parasharami, Archis
Archis A. Parasharami

Mayer Brown

Mr. Parasharami is Co-Chair of Mayer Brown’s Class Action Practice and lead editor of the firm’s Class...  |  Read More

Daniel E. Jones, Esq.
Daniel E. Jones, Esq.

Mayer Brown

Mr. Jones is a litigator and a member of the firm’s Consumer Litigation & Class Actions and Supreme...  |  Read More

Access Anytime, Anywhere

Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording. All formats include course handouts.

To find out which recorded format will provide the best CLE option, select your state:

CLE On-Demand Video