{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012610340479192938, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.508196721311475, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Damages Theories in Data Breach Litigation

The frequency and size of corporate data breaches continues to rise at an exponential pace. These breaches generally involve the personally identifiable information or personal health information of individual customers or patients. The incidents have prompted a surge of privacy litigation, often times in the form of consumer class actions in federal district courts. Plaintiffs face numerous challenges in asserting their claims, and none currently loom larger than those presented by Article III's standing doctrine and its requirement that plaintiffs assert a cognizable injury-in-fact. This paper identifies several of the most prevalent damages theories presented in these data breach class actions and discusses the relative success of each.