than two years ago. Cherny maintains that he has incurred damages as a result of the loss of his confidential information, and that the loss of something intangible or something with an unknown or undefined monetary value, such as an email address, can constitute an injury. Courts have held, however, that the release of potentially sensitive information alone, without evidence of misuse, is insufficient to cause damage to a plaintiff. See Key v. DSW, Inc., 454 F.Supp.2d 684, 690 (S.D.Ohio 2006) (finding that being subjected to an increased risk of identity theft or other related financial crimes when unauthorized persons obtained access to customers’ confidential financial information is not an actual or imminent injury); Forbes v. Wells Fargo, 420 F.Supp.2d. 1018, 1021 (D.Minn.2006) (<HOLDING>); Giordano v. Wachovia Sec., L.L.C., No. 06—
holding that bank had right to set off funds in a customers account against debt that the bank customer had incurred as a surety or guarantor holding that a bank customer did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in records maintained by the bank holding judge in bank robbery prosecution did not abuse discretion in refusing to excuse juror whose wife was bank employee or juror whose daughter had been victim of bank robbery holding the bank liable where the bank had almost complete control over the operation of the company during its last three quarters of operation and where withheld taxes were not paid to the irs on instructions from the bank holding that bank customers whose personal information was stolen from a company that had been retained by the bank did not suffer any present injury or reasonably certain future injury