What Is the PowerSchool Lawsuit?
The PowerSchool lawsuit is a group of separate federal and state cases against the education software company PowerSchool, led by the multidistrict litigation over its December 2024 data breach. That litigation is MDL No. 3149, In re PowerSchool Holdings, Inc., and PowerSchool Group, LLC Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.
The defendants include PowerSchool Holdings, Inc., PowerSchool Group, LLC, and the private equity firm Bain Capital, L.P., and they have contested the claims in court.
Many people searching this topic mean a second, separate case, the $17.25 million Naviance student privacy settlement, which is not a data breach case. The comparison section below separates the two.
“These actions share factual questions arising from a recent cybersecurity incident involving unauthorized access to PowerSchool's Student Information System software, which schools use to store current and former students' and staff members' personal information. Plaintiffs are students, students' guardians, and school staff seeking certification of overlapping nationwide and statewide class actions of individuals affected by the data breach.”
Source: U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, In re: PowerSchool Holdings, Inc., and PowerSchool Group, LLC Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, MDL No. 3149, Transfer Order, Document 152 (April 7, 2025)
Why Are People Filing PowerSchool Lawsuits?
People are filing PowerSchool lawsuits because hackers reached student and teacher records stored in PowerSchool's Student Information System in late December 2024. PowerSchool said it discovered the intrusion on December 28, 2024 and began notifying school districts on January 7, 2025.
Reported estimates run from more than 50 million to about 62 million students, plus roughly 9.5 million teachers, and the exposed data varied by district. It could include names, addresses, dates of birth, limited medical-alert information, and Social Security numbers. PowerSchool said fewer than 25 percent of affected students had a Social Security number exposed and that no payment-card or bank account data was involved.
The JPML's transfer order describes the claims as virtually identical allegations of negligence, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. It says discovery will focus on how and when the breach occurred, how sufficient PowerSchool's data security practices were, and how and when PowerSchool notified breach victims.
The defendants contest the allegations, and no court has found PowerSchool liable.
What Injuries Are Included in the PowerSchool Lawsuit?
The injuries included in the PowerSchool lawsuit are mainly privacy and identity-theft risks, not physical injuries. The four categories below come from the plaintiffs' allegations and a state enforcement petition, and the defendants contest that the exposure caused any of them.
Exposure of Social Security Numbers
A Social Security number is a nine-digit federal identifier that lenders and government agencies use to confirm a person's identity.
Plaintiffs allege the breach exposed Social Security numbers for some students and staff, which raises the risk of identity theft and fraudulent credit applications. PowerSchool has said only a minority of affected students had one exposed, and exposure varied by district.
Exposure of a number is not the same as misuse of it. The claims rest on the allegation that the added risk, and the time and money spent guarding against it, are harm the law can compensate.
Exposure of Medical and Special Education Information
Medical and special education information covers health alerts, disability records, and individualized education details that a school keeps about a student.
The Texas attorney general's petition alleges that medical details, disability records, and special education data were among the information taken. PowerSchool has described the medical information involved as limited.
A plaintiff firm's case summary lists the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act among the claims that survived dismissal. That is a ruling on the pleadings, not a finding that any record was misused.
Exposure of Student Location Data
Location data is information, such as a home address or a school bus stop, that can show where a person is likely to be at a given time.
The Texas petition alleges that bus-stop data could be used to physically locate Texas children. That is the state's allegation and not a proven outcome, and PowerSchool has contested the state's claims.
Collection and Sharing of Student Data Without Consent
Data sharing without consent means a company passes personal information to outside parties without the permission of the people it describes.
This category is separate from the breach. A case brought by students and parents in California federal court alleges PowerSchool collects, uses, and shares student information without proper consent, and the Naviance class action made a related privacy claim before it settled. Both are described in the comparison section below.
Who Qualifies for the PowerSchool Lawsuit?
You may qualify if:
- You were a student, teacher, or other staff member at a school or district that used PowerSchool's Student Information System around December 2024
- You are a parent or legal guardian of a minor student whose school or district used PowerSchool
- You received a breach notice from a school district or from PowerSchool, which can indicate your data was involved
- You can describe harm or risk tied to the exposure, such as a fraud alert, misuse of your Social Security number, or money spent on credit protection
You may not qualify if:
- Your school or district never used PowerSchool's Student Information System, so no records about you were stored there
- You are a defendant, an officer or employee of a defendant, or a judge on the case
- Your claim was already released in a settlement, such as a Naviance class member who did not opt out, which covers only Naviance claims
No class has been certified in MDL 3149, and the court has not set a claims process. Whether a person has a viable claim depends on the state, the records involved, and filing deadlines, and only a qualified attorney reviewing the facts can confirm it. PowerSchool's free credit monitoring enrollment closed on July 31, 2025.
What Is the Current Status of the PowerSchool Lawsuit?
The current status of the PowerSchool lawsuit is active pretrial litigation in MDL 3149, with the motions to dismiss largely decided and no settlement, fund, or claim form announced. As of October 2026, trackers count 89 actions filed and 76 still pending. Two related cases are tracked separately below.
MDL No. 3149 (Data Breach)
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized the cases in the Southern District of California on April 7, 2025 and assigned them to Judge Roger T. Benitez. The order covered 32 actions in three districts and noted 23 related actions in eight others, 55 cases in nine districts in all.
Trackers report the MDL moved to Judge Anthony J. Battaglia on April 1, 2026, which explains why some sources name one judge and some the other. In June 2025 the court appointed Labaton Keller Sucharow interim co-lead counsel for the individual user track, and Hausfeld's James J. Pizzirusso is also co-lead counsel for individual plaintiffs.
On March 17 and 18, 2026 the court largely denied the motions to dismiss filed by PowerSchool and by Bain Capital, and one settlement tracker describes the order as granted in part and denied in part. Negligence, unjust enrichment, and California Unfair Competition Law claims survive, and the claims against Bain proceed under agency, direct liability, and aiding-and-abetting theories. A tracker reports the court denied PowerSchool's motion for reconsideration on May 29, 2026.
No court has found PowerSchool or Bain liable, and no trial date has been reported.
| Proceeding Type | Federal MDL (28 U.S.C. § 1407), putative class actions |
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California |
| Docket | 3:25-md-03149 |
| Judge | Roger T. Benitez until April 1, 2026, then Anthony J. Battaglia, per trackers |
| Magistrate Judge | Michael S. Berg, per docket suffix and trackers |
| Centralized | April 7, 2025 |
| Actions | 89 filed, 76 pending as of October 1, 2026 (mdlupdate.com) |
| Defendants | PowerSchool Holdings, Inc.; PowerSchool Group, LLC; Bain Capital, L.P.; Movate, Inc. |
| Settlement Status | None reported as of September 30, 2026 |
Q.J. v. PowerSchool Holdings LLC (Naviance)
This is a separate privacy class action over the Naviance college and career platform, and it settled for $17.25 million. The claims deadline passed on July 27, 2026, and trackers report final approval in the late summer of 2026, although their dates differ. The Naviance lawsuit page covers the case in full.
| Proceeding Type | Federal class action (not an MDL) |
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Judge | Jorge L. Alonso |
| Settlement Fund | $17,250,000 |
| Settlement Status | Claims closed July 27, 2026; final approval reported by trackers |
Cherkin v. PowerSchool Holdings, Inc.
Students and parents filed this California federal privacy case on May 6, 2024, before the breach was announced, according to the EdTech Law Center's case page. That page reports Judge James Donato dismissed several claims with leave to amend on March 17, 2025, while the privacy and unjust enrichment claims continued. This page could not independently confirm the case's current status.
| Proceeding Type | Federal putative class action, not part of MDL 3149 |
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Judge | James Donato |
| Complaint Filed | May 6, 2024 |
| Settlement Status | None reported by the source consulted |
How Much Will I Get From the PowerSchool Lawsuit?
The amount you will get from the PowerSchool lawsuit is not yet known for the data breach case, because no settlement or fund exists, while the Naviance settlement pays valid claimants an equal share of a $17.25 million fund after fees and costs.
Any payout depends on the case, the number of valid claims, and court approval, and nobody can promise a figure. Settlements in other data breach cases vary widely, and none of them predicts what MDL 3149 will produce, if it settles at all.
As of September 30, 2026, a settlement tracker reported no breach settlement, fund, or claim form for MDL 3149, and the Naviance settlement does not pay breach claims. A website offering a PowerSchool breach claim form deserves caution until a court-approved notice exists.
In the Naviance case, no per-person amount has been published, and class counsel requested up to $6,382,500 in attorneys' fees from the fund. The claims deadline passed on July 27, 2026.
One tracker reports the court in the breach MDL ordered a mandatory settlement conference. A conference gives the sides a structured chance to negotiate, and it does not mean a deal is near.
PowerSchool Lawsuit Updates
Here are the latest PowerSchool lawsuit updates, covering new court filings, rulings, and case-count reports as they're confirmed. Litigation in MDL 3149, the federal PowerSchool data breach litigation, remains active as of November 2026, with no bellwether trial or settlement completed. The timeline below tracks every confirmed development from the first filing forward.
PowerSchool Lawsuit Timeline of Events
Discovery Order Entered in MDL 3149
A settlement tracker lists a discovery order at ECF No. 580 on the MDL 3149 docket, entered on October 30, 2026. The tracker does not summarize the order, and this page did not read it.
Order on Judgment on the Pleadings in MDL 3149
The MDL 3149 docket shows an order on a judgment-on-the-pleadings request at ECF No. 575 on October 26, 2026, according to a settlement tracker. This page did not read the order itself.
MDL 3149 Pending Count Reaches 76 of 89 Actions
Trackers counted 89 actions ever filed in MDL 3149, with 76 still pending and 13 resolved, as of October 1, 2026. The pending figure had been 79 on April 1, 2026, so the count has fallen as individual cases ended.
Tracker Finds No Breach Settlement or Claim Form
A settlement tracker reported on September 30, 2026 that no settlement, fund, or claim form existed for the PowerSchool data breach. It also confirmed the Naviance settlement does not pay breach claims.
Naviance Settlement Final Approval Reported
Claim trackers report final approval of the $17.25 million Naviance settlement in Q.J. v. PowerSchool Holdings LLC at an August 19, 2026 hearing, and another tracker lists a September 26, 2026 minute order. The two dates do not match, and this page did not read the court's order.
Naviance Settlement Claims Deadline Passes
The deadline to file a claim in the Naviance settlement passed on July 27, 2026, after the administrator extended it from an earlier May date. The settlement does not cover the data breach.
Court Denies PowerSchool Reconsideration Motion
A tracker reports Judge Anthony J. Battaglia denied PowerSchool's motion for reconsideration and for certification of an interlocutory appeal in MDL 3149 on May 29, 2026, and declined to stay discovery. The denial leaves the March 2026 ruling in place.
MDL 3149 Moves to Judge Battaglia
Trackers report Judge Roger T. Benitez handled MDL 3149 until April 1, 2026, when it moved to Judge Anthony J. Battaglia. The change explains conflicting judge names across sources.
Court Largely Denies Motions to Dismiss in MDL 3149
The court largely denied the motions to dismiss filed by PowerSchool and Bain Capital in MDL 3149, with the order signed March 17 and filed March 18, 2026. Negligence, unjust enrichment, and California Unfair Competition Law claims proceed, and the ruling is not a finding of liability.
Naviance Settlement Agreement Filed
The Naviance class settlement agreement was filed as Docket 212-1 in Q.J. v. PowerSchool Holdings LLC on February 23, 2026. It set up a $17.25 million fund for students who logged into Naviance during the class period.
Oral Argument on Motions to Dismiss
A plaintiff firm's case summary reports the MDL 3149 court heard oral argument on the defendants' motions to dismiss on January 26, 2026. The ruling followed seven weeks later.
Hacker Matthew Lane Sentenced to Four Years
U.S. District Judge Margaret Guzman in Worcester, Massachusetts sentenced Matthew D. Lane to four years in prison on October 14, 2025 for the PowerSchool breach and a separate telecom breach. The sentence included about $14.1 million in restitution, a $25,000 fine, and three years of supervised release, and Lane had pleaded guilty to extortion and identity theft counts.
Texas Attorney General Sues PowerSchool
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued PowerSchool in state court on September 3, 2025 under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act and Identity Theft Enforcement and Protection Act. The state counted more than 880,000 affected Texas students and educators.
Amended Class Action Complaint Filed in MDL 3149
Plaintiffs filed their Amended Class Action Complaint in MDL 3149 on August 12, 2025, according to a plaintiff firm's case summary. A later pleading added Bain Capital and Movate, Inc. as defendants.
PowerSchool Credit Monitoring Enrollment Closes
PowerSchool's offer of two years of free identity protection and credit monitoring closed to new enrollment on July 31, 2025. The offer was not a settlement and did not release any claims.
Court Appoints Interim Co-Lead Counsel
The MDL 3149 court appointed Labaton Keller Sucharow on June 17, 2025 as interim co-lead counsel for the Track One individual user class action plaintiffs, who include students, parents, teachers, and teachers' unions.
School Districts Receive Their Own Extortion Emails
Individual school districts in the United States and Canada began receiving extortion emails with data samples in May 2025, according to a legal tracker. The emails followed PowerSchool's reported payment of about $2.85 million to the attacker for a video said to show the data being deleted.
JPML Centralizes the Cases as MDL 3149
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation issued its Transfer Order (Document 152) on April 7, 2025, centralizing the PowerSchool data breach actions in the Southern District of California before Judge Roger T. Benitez. The Panel counted 55 cases pending in nine districts.
Cherkin Court Trims Claims Against PowerSchool
In Cherkin v. PowerSchool Holdings, Inc. in the Northern District of California, the court dismissed the deceit, unfair competition, and larceny claims with leave to amend on March 17, 2025, according to the EdTech Law Center. The privacy and unjust enrichment claims continued.
PowerSchool Begins Notifying School Districts
PowerSchool began notifying affected school districts of the breach on January 7, 2025, about ten days after it discovered the intrusion. District notices later reached students, parents, and staff.
PowerSchool Discovers the Intrusion
PowerSchool discovered the unauthorized access to its Student Information System on December 28, 2024. A security-industry account says the attacker had been logged in to the PowerSource support portal since December 19, 2024, using credentials stolen from a contractor's device.
Bain Capital Acquires Majority Ownership
Bain Capital acquired majority ownership of PowerSchool in June 2024, according to a plaintiff firm's case summary. Plaintiffs later cited Bain's control over cybersecurity decisions as the basis for claims against it.
Cherkin Privacy Complaint Filed Against PowerSchool
Students and parents filed Cherkin v. PowerSchool Holdings, Inc., No. 3:24-cv-2706, in the Northern District of California on May 6, 2024. The complaint alleged PowerSchool collects and shares student information without proper consent.
Naviance Class Action Filed in Illinois
Q.J. v. PowerSchool Holdings LLC, No. 1:23-cv-05689, was filed in the Northern District of Illinois on August 18, 2023. It alleged third-party tools intercepted students' communications on the Naviance platform and later settled.
How to File a PowerSchool Lawsuit
To file a PowerSchool lawsuit, follow the 6 steps listed below.
- Confirm your school or district used PowerSchool: The breach involved PowerSchool's Student Information System, so ask the district whether it was a customer around December 2024.
- Locate any breach notice you received: Districts and PowerSchool sent notices by email or letter, and keeping the notice helps show your data may have been involved.
- Document any misuse of your information: Save fraud alerts, credit report entries, identity theft reports, and receipts for credit protection, since they show real harm.
- Check your credit and consider a freeze: A credit freeze with the three bureaus is free and limits new accounts opened with a stolen Social Security number.
- Consult a data breach attorney: Firms on this litigation work on contingency, and a lawyer can explain whether to join MDL 3149 and what your state's deadlines are.
- Use only official sources for any claim form: No breach settlement exists, and the Naviance settlement's official site is PowerSchoolNavianceSettlement.com, so treat any other claim site with caution.
Answer a few questions and a case reviewer will follow up. Free, no obligation.
A case reviewer will follow up soon.
What Did PowerSchool Allegedly Know Before the Data Breach?
Plaintiffs and the Texas attorney general allege PowerSchool failed to use basic safeguards that could have stopped the December 2024 intrusion. Texas's petition says PowerSchool did not encrypt personal data at the database level and lacked multi-factor authentication for employees and contractors. It alleges a hacker used a subcontractor's account to gain administrative access and move unencrypted data to a foreign server.
PowerSchool has contested these claims. A plaintiff firm's account says the attacker used credentials belonging to an employee of the contractor Movate, and a security-industry account says the support tool had no second login step.
Plaintiffs also allege Bain Capital exercised operational control over PowerSchool and made decisions affecting cybersecurity operations. The North Carolina attorney general has publicly said his office is investigating whether PowerSchool broke any laws, and the state estimated nearly 4 million affected people. PowerSchool reportedly paid about $2.85 million to the attacker, yet districts later received their own extortion emails.
| Party | Role | Position |
|---|---|---|
| PowerSchool Holdings, Inc. and PowerSchool Group, LLC | Operator of the Student Information System that was accessed | Contest the claims and lost most of their motion to dismiss in March 2026 |
| Bain Capital, L.P. | Majority owner of PowerSchool since June 2024 | Contests the claims, and the court let claims against it proceed, with no finding of liability |
| Movate, Inc. | Contractor whose employee's credentials were allegedly used | Named as a defendant, according to a plaintiff firm's case summary |
| State of Texas | Plaintiff in a separate state-court suit filed September 3, 2025 | Alleges Texas consumer protection and identity theft law violations |
How Does the PowerSchool Lawsuit Compare to the Naviance Lawsuit?
The PowerSchool data breach lawsuit and the Naviance lawsuit are two separate cases against the same company, and only the Naviance case produced a settlement. Matching the right case to your situation matters, because a Naviance notice does not mean your breach claim was paid.
| Case | What It Involves | Status |
|---|---|---|
| PowerSchool data breach, MDL No. 3149 | Unauthorized access to student and staff records in the Student Information System in December 2024 | Pending, no settlement or claim form reported |
| Naviance, Q.J. v. PowerSchool Holdings LLC | Alleged interception of students' communications on the Naviance platform, not a hacking incident | Settled for $17.25 million, claims closed |
| Cherkin v. PowerSchool Holdings, Inc. | Alleged collection and sharing of student data without proper consent | Current status not independently confirmed |
| State of Texas v. PowerSchool | State consumer protection and identity theft claims over the breach | Described under the defendant section above |
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the PowerSchool lawsuit about?
The PowerSchool lawsuit is mainly about the December 2024 PowerSchool data breach, in which hackers accessed student and staff records stored in the company's Student Information System. The cases are consolidated as MDL No. 3149 in the Southern District of California, and a separate Naviance privacy case settled for $17.25 million.
Is the PowerSchool lawsuit a class action or an MDL?
The PowerSchool data breach lawsuit is an MDL, not a certified class action, although plaintiffs seek certification of nationwide and statewide classes. The Naviance case, by contrast, is a class action that settled.
Is the PowerSchool lawsuit real?
Yes, the PowerSchool lawsuit is real, and the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation created MDL No. 3149 on April 7, 2025. The Naviance settlement is also real, and its official site is PowerSchoolNavianceSettlement.com.
Is there a PowerSchool lawsuit settlement?
A PowerSchool lawsuit settlement exists only for the Naviance case, which created a $17.25 million fund. The data breach MDL has no settlement, fund, or claim form as of September 30, 2026.
How much will I get from the PowerSchool class action lawsuit?
You will get an equal share of the Naviance fund if you filed a valid claim by July 27, 2026, but the amount has not been published. The data breach case has no payout yet, and any future amount depends on a settlement or judgment.
Can I still file a claim in the PowerSchool lawsuit?
No claim form exists for the PowerSchool data breach lawsuit, and the Naviance claims deadline passed on July 27, 2026. People affected by the breach can speak with an attorney about their options and their state's deadlines.
Is the PowerSchool data breach lawsuit the same as the Naviance lawsuit?
No, the PowerSchool data breach lawsuit and the Naviance lawsuit are separate cases in different courts over different conduct. The breach case is MDL No. 3149 in California, while Naviance is Q.J. v. PowerSchool Holdings LLC in the Northern District of Illinois.