Seth Shapiro v AT&T


Mr. Shapiro claims AT&T employees took bribes from hackers and gave them control of his mobile Account Four times over one year. Mr. Shapiro also claims that the hackers then used their control over his mobile Account to take control of his personal and digital finance accounts and steal more than $1.9 million from him. 

02/08/2022 Update Plaintiff requested for the SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY: from Christopher Grivakes to Jennie Lee Andeson.

01/24/2022 Update For the reasons set forth above, the undue delay, prejudice to Defendants, and futility factors weigh against granting Plaintiff leave to amend to file the proposed Fifth Amended Complaint to assert claims for intentional and negligent misrepresentation. The Court **DENIES **Plaintiff’s Motion to File Fifth Amended Complaint.

11/15/2021 Update Shapiro requests that the Court grant his motion to file the proposed amended Complaint adding counts for intentional misrepresentation and negligent misrepresentation. 

** 8/18/21 Update** The Court ordered the Defense AT&T to respond to Plaintiff Seth Shapiro on or before 21 days after the Fourth Amended Complaint got Filed. The estimated deadline is August 27, 2021.

8/6/21 Update Plaintiff Seth Shapiro files Fourth Amended Civil Complaint

6/2/21 Update Defendant AT&T Files a motion to dismiss Count 6 of Plaintiff Seth Shapiro’s Third Amended Complaint because Mr. Shapiro did not allege a duty to speak and because he did not plausibly allege that he would have acted differently if AT&T disclose the limits of its security. 

4/5/21 Update Plaintiff Seth Shapiro has filed their third amended complaint.

2/5/21 Update Judge Marshall ordered that Plaintiff Seth Shapiro's deadline to file a Third Amended Complaint is consistent with the party's stipulation is February 23, 2021. Defendant AT&T's deadline to respond to Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint is March 19, 2021.

Status Update as of 5/29/20 Plaintiff Seth Shapiro filed a first amended complaint.

Status Update as of 1/20/21 The second amended complaint got filed.

Status Update as of 10/17/19 Plaintiff filed the complaint.

Claims in
Seth Shapiro v AT&T
Violation of California Consumer Legal Remedies Act

The California Consumers Legal Remedies Act ("CLRA"), Cal. Civ. Code § 1750 et seq, declare unlawful several "methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices undertaken by any person in a transaction intended to result or which results in the sale or lease of goods or services to any consumer". Forbidden practices include misrepresenting the source of the good and services, representing reconditioned goods as new, advertising goods without having the expected demand in stock, representing a repair is needed when it is not, representing rebates that have hidden conditions, and misrepresenting the authority of a salesman to close a deal.

Violation of California’s Constitutional Right to Privacy

A plaintiff alleging a violation of the California's constitutional right to privacy must establish three elements: (i) a legally protected privacy interest; (ii) a reasonable expectation of privacy under the circumstances; and (iii) a conduct by the defendant constituting a serious invasion of privacy.


Negligence is defined as a failure to behave with the level of care that someone of ordinary prudence would have exercised under the same circumstances. The behavior usually consists of actions, but can also consist of omissions when there is some duty to act (e.g., a duty to help victims of one's previous conduct). 

Violation of California Unfair Competition Law Unfair Business Practice

The Unfair Competition Law of California, BPC § 17200, prohibits false advertising and illegal business practices. The law is also known as the state’s UCL. The law describes “unfair competition” as any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice, or false, deceptive, or misleading advertising. 

Violation of The Federal Communications Act
  1. Under 47 U.S. Code § 201, every telecommunications carrier has a duty to protect the confidentiality of proprietary information of, and relating to, other telecommunication carriers, equipment manufacturers, and customers, including telecommunication carriers reselling telecommunications services provided by a telecommunications carrier.
  2. Under 47 U.S. Code § 222, it shall be the duty of every common carrier engaged in interstate or foreign communication by wire or radio to furnish such communication service upon reasonable request therefor; and, in accordance with the orders of the Commission, in cases where the Commission, after opportunity for hearing, finds such action necessary or desirable in the public interest, to establish physical connections with other carriers, to establish through routes and charges applicable thereto and the divisions of such charges, and to establish and provide facilities and regulations for operating such through routes.
Negligent Supervision and Entrustment

Negligent supervision and entrustment is a cause of action in United States tort law which arises where one party ("the entrustor") is held liable for negligence because they negligently provided another party ("the entrustee") with a dangerous instrumentality, and the entrusted party caused injury to a third party with that instrumentality. The cause of action most frequently arises where one person allows another to drive their automobile.

Violation of Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

In 1986, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), 18 U.S.C. § 1030, was introduced to combat hacking, as an update to the first federal computer fraud statute. It has been updated many times over the years, most notably in 2008, to encompass a broad range of actions well beyond its original purpose. The CFAA forbids the intentional access to a device without permission or in excess of permission, but does not specify what "without authorisation" entails. It has been a weapon perfect for violence to usage against virtually any aspect of electronic operation with harsh punishment schemes and malleable clauses.


See all Cases

 Support us

Let’s make them stop! Make a donation for public service announcements, legal actions, and creating legislation that to make it impractical for the mobile carriers to continue to give your mobile service to criminals.