ClaimsHero, an Arizona law firm that specializes in aggregating claims for class actions, gave a full-throated defense of its overtures to Bartz class members who potentially choose to opt out of the class recovery and pursue their own claims against Anthropic separately.
When the Bartz Class Counsel had contacted ClaimsHero about Class Counsel’s concerns with ClaimsHero’s website, only 6 class members had opted out and so indicated to ClaimsHero.
ClaimsHero argues: “To efficiently address any concern over ClaimsHero’s representation of those six clients, every single one has submitted a declaration stating they (i) were not misled by ClaimsHero, (ii) want to opt out of the Settlement, (iii) want ClaimsHero to represent them, and (iv) understand that filing an individual claim against Anthropic entails risk.” See Declarations of Lisa Barretta, Michael Kochin, Jane Adams, John Carreyrou, Philip Shishkin, and Matthew Sacks.
ClaimsHero asserts Bartz seeks an unconstitutional prior restraint
First Amendment Argument: ClaimsHero even attached a declaration from Professor Martin Redish. Argues ClaimsHero: “In support of this Opposition, Professor Redish submits the attached declaration (the “Redish Decl.”), explaining why firms like ClaimsHero serve an important policy function in ensuring class members are meaningfully informed of their rights, why economic incentives often diverge between class counsel and absent class members, and why the sweeping prior restraint sought here would undermine good class action policy and First Amendment principles.”
Rather than work with ClaimsHero in good faith, Class Counsel decided to immediately seek an unconstitutional and sweeping prior restraint against ClaimsHero’s speech.
ClaimsHero argument about bartz class counsel’s motion to limit claimshero’s overtures
ClaimsHero’s description of its own intake process and involvement in opt outs is terse
Despite the atmospherics of invoking the First Amendment, one issue that ClaimsHero’s brief seems to say very little about is its own intake process and involvement with Bartz class members’ opting out of the class.
Here are some brief mentions of what ClaimsHero actually does:
- As detailed below, ClaimsHero’s version 2 (“V2”) website goes above and beyond in disclosures, stating repeatedly that there is a settlement for “$3,000” totaling “$1.5 billion,” but that clients can “opt out” of that settlement by “pursuing your claims against Anthropic in court.” ClaimsHero explains that opting out means that clients “are giving up the right to get funds from the class action settlement and will need to file an individual suit, and win or settle it, to collect any funds. That takes more time, and isn’t certain . . . .” ClaimsHero asks class members to “[l]et us opt you out, represent you, and fight for more!”
- “It contains links to both the settlement administrator’s and Class Counsel’s website.”
But what does “[l]et us opt you out” mean? How is ClaimsHero involved in a class member’s opt out? Does a class member have to agree to a relationship with ClaimsHero through its website in order to “[l]et us opt you out“?
If so, why is ClaimsHero’s intervention or assistance necessary to opt out at all?
Based on the declaration of one of the class members ClaimsHero, John Carreyrou, it appears that ClaimsHero is actually opting class members out:
If “ClaimsHero would be opting me out of the settlement” means a ClaimsHero employee filled out and submitted the actual opt out notice, that might raise a problem with the court.
Judge Alsup has already ruled out the use of third-party claims aggregators for filing claims of class members for recovery. Although ClaimsHero is not acting as a claims aggregator, it seems to be acting as something akin to an opt-out aggregator or facilitator? But why should third-party ClaimsHero be involved in”[l]et us opt you out“?
One potential concern is that class members may ignore the court-approved notice and information for the class and instead rely only on the information from ClaimsHero’s website, which has not been subject to vetting from the parties to the case (other than Class Counsel’s initial communications), much less review and approval by the court.
The court has also expressed great concern with “hangers on,” surrounding book author class members. If that’s what this appears to the court, then Thursday’s hearing will be intense.
Exhibits 7-9 give clues
UPDATE: Just got access to Exhibits 7-9, which give some clues about ClaimsHero’s involvement.
I hope I have this in the correct order for how a person would sign up for ClaimsHero’s service. There may be other steps, but these steps do seem to delegate the opting out from the class to ClaimsHero to perform for the Bartz class member.
Exhibit 9
Exhibit 7
Exhibit 8
Then ClaimsHero apparently sends the class member who pressed those 2 buttons an engagement as described in their brief:
EXCERPTS FROM CLAIMSHERO’S BRIEF
DOWNLOAD CLAIMSHERO’S OPPOSITION TO BARTZ
Related Stories