Summary
noting that, after conducting a final fairness hearing, the court "directed Plaintiff to file an amended motion for attorney's fees consistent with the principles outlined in In re HP Inkjet Printer Litigation"
Summary of this case from McKnight v. Uber Techs., Inc.Opinion
CASE NO. CV 12-7971 SVW
11-08-2013
TESSA OWEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated Plaintiffs, v. FRESH, INC., and DOES 1 through 10, Defendants.
FINAL ORDER
AND JUDGMENT
On June 3, 2013, at 1:30 p.m., the Court conducted the final fairness hearing on the parties' proposed class action settlement agreement and release (the "Settlement Agreement") and heard Plaintiff's unopposed motion for final approval of the Settlement Agreement and Plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorneys' fees and costs and incentive award to Plaintiff pursuant to sections 2.4-2.5 of the agreement. The Court then directed Plaintiff to file an amended motion for attorney's fees consistent with the principles outlined in In re HP Inkjet Printer Litigation, 716 F.3d 1173 (9th Cir. 2013). [Dkt 40.] Plaintiff did so, and the Court has addressed that motion by separate minute order. [Dkt 46.]
Having carefully considered all papers submitted to the Court and the arguments of counsel, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT:
(1) This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this litigation and over all parties to the litigation, including all members of the class.
(2) The Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff's unopposed motion for final approval of the Settlement Agreement.
(3) The Court confirms as final its preliminary certification for settlement purposes, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, of a settlement class defined as follows:
All persons who purchased merchandise with a credit card at a Fresh, Inc. store in California during the Class Period who were requested to and did provide personal identification information, including but not limited to their street address, email address, telephone number, and/or zip code, which was then recorded by a Fresh, Inc. employee, excluding transactions where such personal identification information was collected for shipping, delivery, or servicing of the purchased merchandise or for special orders.See Settlement Agreement §§ 1.8, 2.1 (the "Settlement Class"). Excluded from the settlement is the one class member who has requested to be excluded from the settlement, as listed in Exhibit A to this Final Order and Judgment.
"Class Period" is defined by the Settlement Agreement as August 8, 2011, through January 21, 2013. See Settlement Agreement § 1.10.
(4) The Court confirms as final its preliminary certification of Plaintiff Tessa Owen as the representative of the Settlement Class;
(5) The Court confirms as final its preliminary appointment of the law firm of Wucetich & Korovilas LLP as class counsel pursuant to Rule 23(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;
(6) The Court finds that the class notice sent to the Settlement Class by U.S. mail, e-mail, and publication pursuant to the Settlement Agreement and the Court's orders constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances, was accomplished in all material respects, and fully met the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, due process, the United States Constitution and any other applicable law.
(7) The Settlement Agreement and the terms set forth therein are incorporated in this Final Order and Judgment by reference. (See Dkt 39-2: Wucetich Decl. Ex. A.) The Court finds that the Settlement Agreement and its terms are fair, just, reasonable, and adequate in all respects. The Court specifically finds that the settlement is rationally related to the strength of Plaintiff's and Class members' claims given the risk, expense, complexity, and duration of further litigation. This Court also finds that the Settlement Agreement is the result of arms-length negotiation between experienced counsel representing the interests of the Plaintiff, the class, and Defendant after thorough factual and legal investigation.
(8) The Court further finds that the response of the Settlement Class to the settlement supports settlement approval. No Settlement Class members have filed or served any objections to the Settlement Agreement, only one of the many thousands of class members has requested to be excluded from the class, and no objection has been filed by any state or federal official given noticed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1715.
(9) Defendant shall issue, and the claims administrator shall distribute, the merchandise certificates to the Settlement Class as provided in section 2.3 of the Settlement Agreement.
(10) Defendant shall comply with the requirements regarding changes to its business practices set forth in section 2.2 of the Settlement Agreement and Exhibit D.
(11) A full opportunity having been offered to the Settlement Class members to participate in the final fairness hearing, no objections having been filed or served, and only one request for exclusion having been filed and served, it is hereby determined that all Settlement Class members are bound by this judgment and their claims released pursuant to the Settlement Agreement and dismissed with prejudice, excluded the class member who filed a valid request for exclusion as listed in Exhibit A to this Final Order and Judgment.
(12) The Court also GRANTS Plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorneys' fees and costs and for an enhancement award to Plaintiff. (See Dkt 46: Order of Nov. 7, 2013, granting plaintiff's amended motion for attorneys' fees and costs and incentive award.)
(13) Without affecting the finality of this judgment in any way, this Court hereby retains continuing jurisdiction over: (a) enforcing the Settlement Agreement; (b) addressing settlement administration matters; (c) all parties for the purpose of construing, enforcing, and administering the Settlement Agreement; and (d) addressing any post-judgment matters as may be appropriate under court rules or applicable law.
(14) Each party shall bear its own attorneys' fees, costs and expenses except as expressly provided in the Settlement Agreement and in this judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________
STEPHEN V. WILSON
United States District Judge