Mark B. DeSanto has extensive litigation experience in federal courts throughout the United States representing consumers, pension participants, investors, and employees in class actions involving false and misleading advertising, defective products, data breaches, ERISA litigation, securities litigation, employee rights, and other consumer protection litigation. Since 2018, Mr. DeSanto has been selected by Pennsylvania Super Lawyers as a Rising Star (an honor reserved for 2.5% of lawyers in Pennsylvania), as selected by his peers based on his professional achievements. Mr. DeSanto authored a chapter of a course handbook published by the Practising Law Institute on March 1, 2018, for the 23rd Annual Consumer Financial Services Institute titled Chapter 57: The Impact of Payment Card II on Class Action Litigation & Settlements (ISBN Number: 9781402431005).
Mr. DeSanto has handled all aspects of class action litigation, from inception through pretrial motion practice, and contributed significantly to the following class actions that have recovered more than $300 million for class members (among others):
- Washtenaw Emps.' Ret. Sys. v. Walgreen Co., Civ. No. 1:15-cv-03187 (N.D. Ill.) (settled – $105 million) (represented nationwide class of investors asserting 10b-5 and 20(a) violations against Walgreens);
- In re St. Jude Medical, Inc. Securities Litigation, Civ. No. 10-0851 (D. Minn. 2010) (settled – $39.25 million) (represented nationwide class of investors asserting 10b-5 and 20(a) violations against medical device company and obtained class certification); and
- In re Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, MDL No. 14–2522 (D. Minn.) (settled – $39 million) (represented nationwide class action of card-issuing financial institutions asserting negligence claims arising from the highly-publicized 2013 Target data breach, and was extensively involved in class certification briefing, which resulted in the first-ever certified class of financial institutions asserting tort claims, see In re Target Corp. Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig., 309 F.R.D. 482 (D. Minn. 2015), appeal dismissed(June 23, 2016));
- Louisiana Municipal Police Employees’ Retirement System v. Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc. et al., Civ. No. 2:11-cv-00289 (D. Vt.) (settled – $36.5 million) (represented financial institutions in class action lawsuit brought on behalf of all Keurig Green Mountain shareholders, alleging that the company and its executives violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934);
- Snitzer et al v. The Board of Trustees of the American Federation of Musicians and Employers’ Pension Fund et al, No. 1:17-cv-05361 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) (settled – $26.85 million) (represented participants alleging that trustees violated ERISA by making imprudent investment allocations in illiquid, high-risk “alternative” asset classes, and paid exorbitant fees to active managers, and ERISA’s duty of loyalty by withholding information from pension participants);
- Lacher et al v. Aramark Corp., 2:19-cv-00687 (E.D. Pa. 2019) (settled – $21 million) (represented a class of Aramark’s current and former managers alleging that Aramark breached its employment contracts by failing to pay bonuses and restricted stock unit compensation to managers nationwide);
- In re Wawa, Inc. Data Security Litig., Lead Case No. 2:19-cv-06019-GEKP (E.D. Pa) (settled - $12 million) (represented a class of consumers whose personal information was compromised in the highly-publicized Wawa data breach);
- High St. Rehab., LLC v. Am. Specialty Health Inc., No. 2:12-cv-07243-NIQA, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147847 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 29, 2019) (settled – $11.75 million) (represented a class of chiropractors and other similar healthcare practitioners alleging, inter alia, that Cigna and its third-party claims management provider’s use of utilization management review (“UMR”) when evaluating out-of-network claims for chiropractic services performed on individuals who participated in employer-sponsored health benefits Plans that Cigna insured and/or for which Cigna administered benefits claims violated ERISA);
- Lietz v. Cigna Corp. (In re Cigna-American Specialty Health Admin. Fee Litig.), No. 2:16-cv-03967-NIQA, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146899 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 29, 2019) (settled – $8.25 million) (represented insureds alleging that Cigna violated ERISA by charging an elevated amount for services that included an administrative fee charged by Cigna’s third-party claims management provider, and only passing on a small portion of the elevated amount charged to the doctor, while knowingly hiding this fee from insureds);
- Smith v. ComplyRight, Inc., No. 1:18-cv-4990, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174217 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 7, 2019) (settled – $3 million) (represented a class of consumers whose personal information was maintained on ComplyRight’s website during a data breach that occurred from at least April 20, 2018 through May 22, 2018);
- In re HomeAdvisor, Inc. Litig., No. 16-cv-01849-PAB-KLM (D. Colo.) (represented multiple nationwide and state classes of home service professionals alleging that HomeAdvisor misrepresented the nature and quality of its homeowner leads);
- Kyles et al v. Stein Mart, Inc. et al, No. 1:19-cv-00483-CFC (D. Del. 2018) (represented a class of consumers whose personal information was compromised in a data breach involving Stein Mart and Annex Cloud at various times between December 28, 2017 and July 9, 2018);
- In re Rutter's Data Sec. Breach Litig., No. 1:20-cv-382 (M.D. Penn.) (represented a class of consumers whose personal information was compromised in a data breach of Rutter’s payment system); and
- In re: MacBook Keyboard Litig., No: 5:18-cv-02813-EJD (N.D. Cal.) (represented a class of consumers alleging that certain Apple MacBook laptop models contain a known defect plaguing the functionality of Apple’s notorious butterfly keyboard).
Mr. DeSanto received his Juris Doctor (J.D.), cum laude, from the University of Miami School of Law in 2013, where he was also a member of the National Security and Armed Conflict Law Review. During his second and third years of law school, Mr. DeSanto worked full-time at a securities litigation firm while also attending law school full-time and earning Dean’s List and President’s Honor Roll distinction (4.0 GPA) as well as honors distinction in Trial & Litigation Skills courses I and II. Prior to attending law school, Mr. DeSanto attended the University of Miami where he earned his Bachelor of Business Administration (B.B.A.) in Finance in 2009. Mr. DeSanto is admitted to practice law in Florida, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey.
Outside of the office, Mr. DeSanto enjoys spending time with his wife and son, playing golf, and going to the gym early every morning.