Adoma v. The University of Phoenix, Inc. et al

Filing 140

ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 10/25/2012 ORDERING that the hearing on the 139 Joint Motion for Final Approval of the Settlement Class is CONTINUED to 12/17/2012 at 10:00 a.m.. No later than 11/5/2012, the parties shall jointly FILE a brief and/or declarations that address whether the settlement in this action is subject to the notice requirements set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1715(b), and if so, whether the requirements have been met. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10

DIANE ADOMA,
NO. CIV. S-10-0059 LKK/GGH

11
12

Plaintiff,
v.
O R D E R

13

THE UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX,
INC., et al.,

14
Defendants.
/

15
16

The parties have filed a Joint Motion for Final Approval of

17

the Settlement Class, scheduled for hearing on November 5, 2012.

18

(ECF no. 139.)

19

Previously, by order dated June 19, 2012, the court granted

20

preliminary approval of a class action settlement and conditionally

21

certified the settlement classes herein. (ECF no. 137.)

22

The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-2, 199

23

Stat. 4-14 (“CAFA”) sets forth the following notice requirements

24

when settlement is reached in certain class action cases:

25
26

Not later than 10 days after a proposed settlement of a
class action is filed in court, each defendant that is
participating in the proposed settlement shall serve
1

1
2

[notice of the proposed settlement] upon the appropriate
State official of each State in which a class member
resides and the appropriate Federal official....

3

28 U.S.C. § 1715(b).1 The statute provides detailed requirements

4

for the contents of such a notice. Id.

5

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1715(d), the court is precluded from

6

granting final approval of a class action settlement until the

7

notice requirement is met. Specifically:

8
9
10

An order giving final approval of a proposed settlement
may not be issued earlier than 90 days after the later
of the dates on which the appropriate Federal official
and the appropriate State official are served with the
notice required under [28 U.S.C. § 1715(b)].

11

According

to

12

requirements appears to be to expand the protection afforded class

13

members

14

governmental

15

finalized.”

16

Practice and Procedure § 1797.6 (3d ed. 2012).

by

a

leading

encouraging
officials
Charles

Alan

treatise,

“The

appropriate
before

purpose

scrutiny

class-action

Wright

&

Arthur

R.

of

these

by

relevant

settlements
Miller,

new

are

Federal

17

The court has examined the parties’ filings beginning with the

18

notice of settlement filed on February 27, 2012 (ECF no. 123), and

19

has found neither a statement of compliance with the CAFA notice

20

requirements nor an explanation of why this action is not subject

21

to those requirements.

22
23

The court finds determination of this issue to be necessary
before it can rule on the pending joint motion.

24
25
26

1

“Appropriate Federal official” and “appropriate State
official” are respectively defined by 28 U.S.C. § 1715(a),
subdivisions (1) and (2).
2

1

Accordingly, the court orders as follows:

2

[1] The hearing on the Joint Motion for Final Approval

3

of the Settlement Class is CONTINUED to December 17, 2012 at

4

10:00 a.m.

5

[2] No later than November 5, 2012, the parties shall jointly

6

FILE a brief and/or declarations that address whether the

7

settlement

8

requirements set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1715(b), and if so,

9

whether the requirements have been met. If the requirements

10

have been satisfied, the parties are to provide (a) details

11

of their compliance with the requirements, including the

12

dates on which notices were served, the parties noticed, and

13

any responses received, and (b) documentation evidencing

14

compliance.

15

satisfied, the parties are to advise the court on how they

16

intend to proceed to remedy this omission.

17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18

DATED:

in

this

If

the

action

notice

October 25, 2012.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
3

is

subject

requirements

to

the

have

not

notice

been