Frank Hedin represents both plaintiffs and defendants in a wide range of complex litigation, with a particular focus on data privacy and consumer class action litigation. Frank’s clients have included nationwide classes of consumers, patent holders, small businesses, and multinational corporations. His tenacious case strategies, compelling briefs, and talent for persuasion help safeguard his clients’ interests and achieve their legal and business objectives.
Prior to joining Carey Rodriguez, Frank served for fifteen months as law clerk to the Honorable William Q. Hayes, United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, a role in which he learned how to weave legal theory into compelling factual narratives that can persuade both judges and juries.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida
U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
U.S. District Court, Western District of Wisconsin
Numerous federal courts on pro hac vice basis
Class counsel on behalf of 3.7 million individuals in nationwide Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) litigation against Abercrombie & Fitch Co. and Hollister Co. Reached $10 million settlement with the defendants on behalf of the class (recently granted final approval by the Court).
Interim class counsel in nationwide class action alleging violation of Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) against Shutterfly, Inc. Obtained landmark ruling on issue of first impression concerning statute’s construction and its application to scans of face geometry derived from photographs. Reached favorable settlement on individual basis.
Represent plaintiffs and putative nationwide classes in numerous actions alleging violation of BIPA, including actions against Facebook, Inc., Google, Inc., Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc., and Crème de la Crème, Inc.
Represent plaintiff and putative nationwide class in TCPA action alleging transmission of unsolicited text messages against Caribou Coffee Company, Inc.
Represent plaintiff and putative class in action alleging Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act violations against Miami-Dade County, among other defendants.
Represent plaintiff and putative class in action alleging violation of the Michigan Video Rental Privacy Act (VRPA) against Hearst Communications, Inc. Recently defeated defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of Article III standing in one of the first judicial opinions applying the Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo v. Robins.
Represent major dietary and nutritional supplement company in various litigation against competitors, including the prosecution of false advertising claims against competitor based on use of the terms “100% natural” and “healthy” to describe competitor’s products.
Defended and obtained favorable result for cosmetics company in trademark infringement litigation brought by direct competitor.
Represent patent holder in prosecution of infringement claims against Sony involving PlayStation multiplayer gaming technology.
Represented patent holder in prosecution of claims against several movie studios based on alleged infringement of video and DVD disc technology. Settled on terms favorable to client.
Represented luxury real estate auctioneer prosecute claims for defamation and tortious interference against a direct competitor. Settled on terms favorable to client.
Represented large Central American company in international health insurance dispute, which settled on terms highly favorable to client.
Pro bono counsel for indigent plaintiff alleging claims of excessive force against several Miramar, Florida police officers.
Represented indigent plaintiffs in probate dispute and action to quiet title to real property. Obtained order quieting title in favor of client at summary judgment.
Chimeno-Buzzi v. Hollister Co., No. 14-23120-CIV, 2015 WL 9269266 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 18, 2015) (granting approval of $10 million settlement that resolves class claims alleging violation of TCPA)
Norberg v. Shutterfly, Inc., --- F. Supp. 3d ---, 2015 WL 9914203 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 29, 2015) (holding, in issue of first impression, that protections of Illinois’ BIPA apply to scans of face geometry derived from photographs, and denying defendant’s motion to dismiss)
In re Facebook Biometric Info. Privacy Litig., --- F. Supp. 3d , 2016 WL 2593853 (N.D. Cal. May 5, 2016) (holding that BIPA applies to scans of face geometry derived from photographs, denying motion to dismiss complaint filed by non-users of Facebook)
Edwards, et al. v. Hearst Communications, Inc., --- F. Supp. 3d ---, 2016 WL 3369541 (S.D.N.Y. June 17, 2016) (denying defendant’s motion to dismiss class action complaint alleging violation of the Michigan VRPA)
Rothschild Digital Media Innovations, LLC v. Sony Computer Entm’t Am. LLC, No. 5:14-CV-03928-PSG, 2015 WL 1522369 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2015) (denying defendant’s motion for rule 11 sanctions, finding that complaint adequately alleges claim that Sony PlayStation multiplayer gaming technology infringes plaintiff’s patent)
Panelist - The Evolving Judicial and Regulatory Landscape of Biometrics Litigation LIVE Webcast – Thursday, October 13, 2016 (12:00 P.M. to 2:00 P.M. EST)