Greer v. Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc.
Filing
66
ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 2/7/2018 ORDERING plaintiff's 55 motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part and the parties are ORDERED to jointly file a revised notice within fourteen days of this order. After rec eiving and reviewing the parties' joint filing, the court will issue an order noting additional changes, if any, approving the notice and issuing a notice plan. As discussed at hearing, DSG should be prepared to provide class information within ten days of the court's order approving the notice and issuing a notice plan. (Becknal, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
10
JIMMY GREER, individually, and on
behalf of others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
11
14
ORDER
v.
12
13
No. 2:15-cv-01063-KJM-CKD
DICK’S SPORTING GOODS, INC., a
Delaware corporation; and DOES 1
through 100, inclusive,
Defendants.
15
16
Before the court is plaintiff Jimmy Greer’s motion for approval of proposed class
17
18
notice and notice plan. Defendant Dick’s Sporting Goods opposes the motion and alternately
19
provides its own proposed notice. For reasons explained below, plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED
20
in part and DENIED in part and the parties are ORDERED to jointly file a revised notice within
21
fourteen days of this order.
22
I.
23
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Jimmy Greer (“plaintiff”) filed a class action complaint on March 19,
24
2015, in Sacramento County Superior Court, alleging defendant Dick’s Sporting Goods (“DSG”)
25
violated several provisions of the California Labor Code and California Business and Professions
26
Code § 17200, et seq. Removal Not. Ex. A, Compl., ECF No. 1-1. DSG removed the action to
27
this court, ECF No. 1, and plaintiff subsequently filed the operative first amended complaint, First
28
Am. Comp. (“FAC”), ECF No. 14.
1
1
On April 13, 2017, the court granted plaintiff’s motion to certify two subclasses
2
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3). See generally Class Cert. Order, ECF No. 45.
3
The first certified class is defined as:
4
All non-exempt or hourly paid employees who worked for
Defendant in its DSG retail stores within California at any time
from March 18, 2011 until January 31, 2015 (the “Security Check
Class”).
5
6
7
Id. at 3. The second certified class is defined as:
8
All non-exempt or hourly paid employees who worked for
Defendant in its DSG retail stores within California at any time
from March 18, 2011 until [April 13, 2017] (the “Business
Reimbursement Class”).
9
10
11
Id. at 4.
12
On January 10, 2018, the court denied without prejudice DSG’s motion to stay this
13
action pending the California Supreme Court’s decisions on two questions certified by the Ninth
14
Circuit. ECF No. 64. After DSG filed its motion to stay, but before the court issued its order
15
denying the motion, plaintiff moved for approval of its proposed class notice and notice plan.
16
Mot., ECF No. 55. DSG opposes the motion, contending (1) the court should stay this action and
17
defer ruling on class notice until the stay is lifted, or, alternatively, (2) the court should approve
18
DSG’s proposed notice. Opp’n, ECF No. 56 at 4. 1 The court took the matter under submission
19
after oral argument, Jan. 12, 2017 Hr’g Mins., ECF No. 65, and resolves the motion here.
20
II.
21
LEGAL STANDARD
For classes certified under Rule 23(b)(3), “the court must direct to class members
22
the best notice that is practicable under the circumstances, including individual notice to all
23
members who can be identified through reasonable effort.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B); see
24
Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 U.S. 156, 175 (1974). The notice must be “reasonably
25
calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action
26
and afford them an opportunity to present their objections.” Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank &
27
28
1
All references to the parties’ briefing and exhibits correspond to ECF page numbers, not the
briefing and exhibits’ internal pagination.
2
1
Tr. Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314 (1950). Thus, “[t]he notice should describe the action and the
2
plaintiffs’ rights in it.” Id. Under Rule 23(c)(2)(B),
3
The notice must clearly and concisely state in plain, easily
understood language:
4
(i) the nature of the action;
5
(ii) the definition of the class certified;
6
(iii) the class claims, issues, or defenses;
7
(iv) that a class member may enter an appearance through an
attorney if the member so desires;
8
9
(v) that the court will exclude from the class any member who
requests exclusion;
10
(vi) the time and manner for requesting exclusion; and
11
(vii) the binding effect of a class judgment on members under Rule
23(c)(3).
12
13
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B).
14
Furthermore, “due process requires at a minimum that an absent plaintiff be
15
provided with an opportunity to remove himself from the class by executing and returning an ‘opt
16
out’ or ‘request for exclusion’ form to the court.” Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797,
17
812 (1985).
18
III.
19
DISCUSSION
As noted, the parties submit dueling proposed notices. See Pl.’s Ex. 1, ECF
20
No. 55-1 at 6-9; DSG Ex. 2, ECF No. 56-1 at 11-16. At hearing, the parties explained that
21
although plaintiff’s proposed notice incorporates certain DSG edits, plaintiff filed his motion for
22
approval of class notice before the parties completed meet and confer efforts. Accordingly,
23
DSG’s opposition includes extensive suggested revisions to plaintiff’s proposed notice. See DSG
24
Ex. 2. Plaintiff’s reply did not address DSG’s proposed revisions. At hearing, plaintiff’s counsel
25
explained that plaintiff is chiefly concerned with DSG’s proposed electronic opt-out methods, and
26
his concerns with DSG’s other proposed language, if any, are minor. Given the record before it,
27
the court evaluates the dueling notices and ensures Rule 23(c)(2)(B)’s requirements are met. See
28
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B).
3
1
2
A.
The Parties’ Proposed Notice Language
The following charts identify the parties’ main points of disagreement. Plaintiff’s
3
proposed language is provided in plain text. DSG’s objections are noted as strike-outs of
4
plaintiff’s language; DSG’s proposed alternative language, if any, is indicated in italics. All the
5
text in bold or underlined is also in bold or underlined in both parties’ proposed notices, unless
6
otherwise indicated.
7
1.
8
DSG proposes changes to discrete sections of the body of the notice, as reflected in
9
10
11
12
13
Body of Notice
the following chart:
Section of Notice
Caption
Section entitled, “WHY
SHOULD I READ THIS
NOTICE?”
The purpose of this Notice is to inform you that your rights may be
affected by the proceedings in a class action lawsuit pending before
Judge Kimberly J. Mueller of the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of California (the “Court”). The Court has
ordered that this Notice be sent to you so that you can be fully
informed about the lawsuit and your rights and options in
connection with it make an informed decision whether to remain in
the lawsuit or request to be excluded from it.
Section entitled, “WHAT
IS THE LITIGATION
ABOUT?”
Dick’s denies Plaintiff’s claims. It maintains that it correctly paid
Security Check Class members for all time worked and that it is not
required under California law to reimburse Business
Reimbursement Class members for the cost of any the clothing
purchases for they wore to work, in part because the Look Policy
did not require them instructed employees that they were not
required to purchase any new clothing for work.
Section entitled, “WHO
REPRESENTS THE
CLASS?”
As a member of the class, you also have the option to enter an
appearance through an attorney of your choice. If you choose to be
represented by an attorney other than Class Counsel, you will be
responsible retaining [sic] your own attorney.
Section entitled, “WHAT
FEES AND COSTS
ARE INVOLVED?”
Because Class Counsel are representing the class on a contingency
fee basis, . Cclass members may participate in any ultimate
recovery without incurring will not incur any out-of-pocket fees or
costs. That means that Class Counsel will only be paid their fees
and costs if they Plaintiff prevails at trial or a settlement is reached.
In that event, Class Counsel will make a request to the Court for
attorneys’ fees and costs, to be paid from any judgment or
settlement. Applications for attorneys’ fees and expenses are
subject to Court approval.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Proposed Language
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN OR OPT OUT OF
CLASS ACTION
28
4
1
Pl.’s Ex. 1 at 6-10; DSG Ex. 2 at 11-15.
2
The court accepts DSG’s proposed change to the caption. The certification notice
3
should provide class members with sufficient information about the case to make an informed
4
decision about their participation. See Manual For Complex Litigation (Fourth) (“MCL”) §
5
21.311 (2004). DSG’s caption accurately reflects that purpose.
6
The court rejects as unnecessary DSG’s changes to the “WHY SHOULD I READ
7
THIS NOTICE?” section; however, plaintiff’s proposed language should be broken into discrete
8
paragraphs, reading:
9
The purpose of this Notice is to inform you that your rights may be
affected by the proceedings in a class action lawsuit pending before
Judge Kimberly J. Mueller of the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of California (the “Court”).
10
11
The Court has ordered that this Notice be sent to you so that you
can be fully informed about the lawsuit and your rights and options
in connection with it.
12
13
14
The balance of this section proposed by plaintiff should remain unchanged.
15
16
The court accepts DSG’s proposed changes to the “WHAT IS THE LITIGATION
ABOUT?” section, as DSG’s language more accurately represents DSG’s position.
17
The court rejects DSG’s proposed edit to section “WHO REPRESENTS THE
18
CLASS?” because the proposed edit would strike important clarifying language. While the notice
19
should include plaintiff’s language, “for” should be inserted between “responsible” and
20
“retaining.”
21
The court rejects DSG’s proposed change to the first sentence in the “WHAT
22
FEES AND COSTS ARE INVOLVED?” section. It accepts DSG’s proposed deletion in the
23
second sentence of (1) “That means that” and (2) replacement of “they” with “Plaintiff,” but
24
requires the addition to read, “Plaintiff, on behalf of the class, prevails. . . .”
25
2.
26
DSG also proposes several significant changes to a chart entitled, “WHAT ARE
“Rights and Options” Chart
27
MY RIGHTS AND OPTIONS IN THIS MATTER?” In addition to the changes noted in the
28
table below, DSG proposes moving the chart to immediately follow the section, “WHAT IS THE
5
1
LITIGATION ABOUT?”, and to precede other sections answering the following questions:
2
“WHAT IS A CLASS ACTION?,” “WHAT RECOVERY DOES THE ACTION SEEK?,” and
3
“WHO REPRESENTS THE CLASS?” The table below reflects plaintiff’s proposed language
4
and defendant’s proposed changes, using the same convention adopted above.
5
7.
WHAT ARE MY RIGHTS AND OPTIONS IN THIS MATTER LAWSUIT?
6
If you wish to remain in the case, you do not need to do anything right
now. You will be automatically included as a member of the certified
class and you will receive further notices as the case progresses.
7
Stay in the lawsuit. Give up rights but share in possible benefits.
8
9
10
11
OPTION 1
12
Remain in the
Class
AND be
represented
by Capstone
Law
Do Nothing
13
If you wish to remain in the case, but you want to hire your own
attorney, you must notify Class Counsel, and whichever attorney(s)
you choose must also notify the Court.
14
15
16
OPTION 2
Remain in the
Class BUT
retain your own
lawyer
17
18
19
If the Class obtains a favorable judgment or a settlement is reached,
you may receive a portion of any monetary recovery. Whether the
judgment is favorable or unfavorable to the Class, you will be
bound by the result, and you will give up the right to separately sue
Dick’s for legal claims that are the same or related to those alleged in
this lawsuit. You may also be called to testify at trial by either
Plaintiff or Dick’s, and/or to provide sworn deposition testimony in
this matter.
Get out of the lawsuit. Retain your rights but give up possible
benefits.
20
21
22
By doing nothing, you are choosing to stay in the Class. If the Class
obtains a favorable judgment or a settlement is reached, you may
receive a portion of any monetary recovery. Whether the judgment is
favorable or unfavorable to the Class, you will be bound by the result,
and you will give up the right to separately sue Dick’s for legal claims
that are the same or related to those alleged in this lawsuit. You may
also be called to testify at trial by either Plaintiff or Dick’s, and/or to
provide sworn deposition testimony in this matter.
OPTION 3
23
Exclude
yourself
from the Class
Ask to be
Excluded
If you do not wish to participate in this case, you have the right to
exclude yourself from the Class. If you do not want to participate in
the lawsuit, you must request to be excluded by either completing and
mailing the enclosed Request for Exclusion Form to the courtappointed administrator at the address listed below, ,no later than [45
days after mailing]. 2
If you request to be excluded, you will retain the right to pursue your
own claims against Dick’s with legal counsel of your choosing, but the
statute of limitations on your claim will continue to run. You will not
give up any rights or claims you may have by excluding yourself from
this action. You will not be bound by any judgment or settlement
reached in the class action.
24
25
26
27
28
2
DSG proposes deleting all of plaintiff’s proposed underlining in this section. Pl.’s Ex. 1 at 9;
DSG Ex. 2 at 12.
6
1
Pl.’s Ex. 1 at 8-9; DSG Ex. 2 at 12-13.
2
3
For the sake of clarity, the court accepts DSG’s suggestion “lawsuit” replace
“matter” in the header.
4
The court rejects DSG’s proposed deletion of the “Option 1,” “Option 2” and
5
“Option 3” cells. As to Option 1, the court accepts DSG’s proposed “Do Nothing” to replace
6
“Remain in the Class AND . . . .” Also as to option 1, the court rejects and accepts in part DSG’s
7
proposed changes to Option 1’s substantive text and requires the text to read:
8
If you wish to remain in the case, you do not need to do anything
right now. You will be automatically included as a member of the
certified class and you will receive further notices as the case
progresses.
9
10
14
If the Class obtains a favorable judgment or a settlement is reached,
you may receive a portion of any monetary recovery. Whether the
judgment is favorable or unfavorable to the Class, you will be
bound by the result, and you will give up the right to separately sue
Dick’s for legal claims that are the same or related to those alleged
in this lawsuit. You may also be called to testify at trial by either
Plaintiff or Dick’s, and/or to provide sworn deposition testimony in
this matter.
15
The court rejects DSG’s proposed deletion of all text as part of Option 2, which
11
12
13
16
notifies a class member that he or she “may enter an appearance through an attorney if the
17
member so desires[.]” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B)(iv). However, the court modifies
18
plaintiff’s proposed language as follows: “If you wish to remain in the Class but want to hire
19
yourown attorney, you and your attorney must notify Class Counsel and the Court that you have
20
hired an attorney.” The balance of the Option 2 language should remain as proposed by plaintiff.
21
22
In addition, the court rejects all of DSG’s proposed changes to the Option 3
language.
23
The court agrees with DSG’s placement of the “Options” chart to immediately
24
follow the “WHAT IS THE LITIGATION ABOUT” section rather than at the end of the notice.
25
See MCL § 21.31 (“Counsel should logically order the information that will assist the class
26
member in making important decisions, such as whether to opt out of the class, object to a
27
settlement, or file a claim.”).
28
/////
7
1
3.
2
DSG also proposes two additional sections be added as the final two sections of
DSG’s Proposed Additions
3
the notice, immediately preceding the text reading, “PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE
4
COURT REGARDING THIS MATTER”:
5
8. HOW DO I STAY IN THE CLASS?
You do not have to do anything at this time to stay in the Class.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
9.
HOW DO I ASK TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE CLASS?
If you do not want to stay in the Class, you must submit a Request for Exclusion no later than
[45 days from mailing]. You may submit a Request for Exclusion in any of the following ways:
· By email to [insert email address];
· By text message to [insert phone number],
· Online at [insert web address of online Request for Exclusion form here];
· By telephone call to [insert phone number]; or
· By U.S. Mail using the enclosed Request for Exclusion form.
If you choose to request exclusion online, by email, or by text message, your request must be
sent no later than [45 days from mailing] and must include the following information:
· Your first and last name;
· The following ID number: [insert ID number]
· The following PIN number: [insert PIN number]
If you choose to request exclusion by telephone call, you must do so no later than [45 days from
mailing]. You will be asked to enter your ID and PIN numbers at the prompts.
If you choose to request exclusion by U.S. Mail, the enclosed Request for Exclusion form must
be postmarked by no later than [45 days from mailing].
17
18
DSG Ex. 2 at 14.
19
The court rejects DSG’s proposed “HOW DO I STAY IN THE CLASS” section as
20
duplicative of the earlier described options. The court accepts DSG’s proposed “HOW DO I
21
ASK TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE CLASS” section with the following modifications: First,
22
the section shall immediately succeed the section entitled “WHAT ARE MY RIGHTS AND
23
OPTIONS IN THIS LAWSUIT? and immediately precede the section “WHAT IS A CLASS
24
ACTION?” In addition, the notice must be revised to refer only to mail and email opt-out
25
methods, as discussed below.
26
/////
27
/////
28
8
1
4.
2
Although not requested by the parties, the court requires the following changes. In
3
the section, “WHAT IS A CLASS ACTION?” the court strikes the parties’ proposed language, as
4
it is unnecessarily legalistic and potentially confusing. See Pl.’s Ex. 1 at 7; see also DSG Ex. 2 at
5
13. Instead, the following language shall be provided:
6
Changes Required by the Court
In a class action lawsuit, one or more people called “Class
Representatives” (in this case Jimmy Greer) sue on behalf of other
people with similar claims. The people with similar claims are
“Class Members.” In a class action lawsuit, one court resolves the
issues for everyone in the Class—except for those people who
choose to exclude themselves from the Class.
7
8
9
10
In addition, as the first sentence in the section “WHY SHOULD I READ THIS
11
NOTICE?,” the parties shall add: “Dick’s Sporting Goods’ records show that you currently work,
12
or previously worked, for Dick’s.” See Pl.’s Ex. 1 at 6; DSG Ex. 2 at 11.
13
B.
14
Opt-Out Form
The court accepts plaintiff’s proposed opt-out form, Pl.’s Ex. 2, which will be
15
included with the notice mailed to class members, with the following adjustments to the second
16
sentence: (1) the word “back” should be deleted and (2) the claims administrator’s mailing
17
address should be provided at the end of the sentence. Accordingly, the latter half of the second
18
sentence should read, “you must complete and sign this form and mail it to the Claims
19
Administrator at [address] before [date].”
20
The court rejects DSG’s proposal, which could be interpreted to suggest a class
21
member is merely requesting to opt-out, rather than affirmatively opting-out by sending the
22
notice. See DSG Ex. 4.
23
24
C.
Third Party Administrator and Estimated Costs
Plaintiff proposes CPT Group, Inc. (“CPT”) as its third-party administrator. Mot.
25
at 7. After reviewing the declaration of CPT’s senior vice president of operations, Green Decl.,
26
ECF No. 55-2, and accompanying material on CPT’s experience, Ex. A, Green Decl., the court is
27
satisfied that CPT is an experienced administrator. See, e.g., Sequeira Ruiz v. JCP Logistics, Inc.,
28
No. SACV131908JLSANX, 2016 WL 6156211, at *7 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 2016) (collecting cases
9
1
and finding CPT Group qualified to administer class notice and claim administration procedure in
2
settlement).
3
CPT Group estimates $12,000 in estimated mailing costs, excluding a $2,500
4
interactive website charge to which plaintiff objects; it estimates an additional $3,105.56 in other
5
costs, including skip traces, remailing, live call center support and tracking of opt-outs. Ex. B,
6
Green Decl. Plaintiff will pay the $12,605 in notice costs. Mot. at 7; see Eisen, 417 U.S. at 177
7
(plaintiff typically bears cost of notice).
8
9
Although the court finds CPT is a qualified administrator, neither the briefing nor
CPT’s materials sufficiently explain CPT’s processes for confirming class members’ mailing
10
addresses and processing mail returned as undeliverable. The court is not satisfied by the mere
11
inclusion of skip tracing and remailing costs in CPT’s estimate. Plaintiff is ORDERED to
12
provide the court with a supplemental explanation of up to five pages correcting this omission
13
within fourteen days of this order.
14
D.
Opt-Out Procedures
15
“[D]ue process requires at a minimum that an absent plaintiff be provided with an
16
opportunity to remove himself from the class by executing and returning an ‘opt out’ or ‘request
17
for exclusion’ form to the court.” Phillips Petroleum, Co., 472 U.S. at 812. “The opt-out
18
procedure should be simple and should afford class members a reasonable time in which to
19
exercise their option.” MCL § 21.321.
20
The parties dispute the opt-out procedures to be made available to class members.
21
DSG argues opt-out methods should reflect “the way that people communicate in this century,”
22
and proposes members be permitted to opt-out through a website, email, text message and mail.
23
Opp’n at 10. Plaintiff argues this “muti-prong opt-out procedure . . . is simply unnecessary and
24
unwarranted,” and complains of “complications and significant costs” and potential “issues
25
verifying the identity of the message’s source and whether [a] message constitutes a legally
26
binding request for exclusion from the class.” Mot. at 9; see also Green Decl. ¶ 9 (“In CPT’s
27
experience, Exclusion Requests have not been permitted via text message.”). Plaintiff argues the
28
/////
10
1
opt-out form it proposes to send along with the notice, which class members may fill out and
2
return by U.S. Mail, satisfies due process requirements. Mot. at 8-9.
3
The court is not persuaded by DSG’s argument that allowing class members to
4
opt-out through U.S. Mail “is essentially to allow no effective opt out at all.” See Opp’n at 10.
5
U.S. Mail offers a simple opt-out procedure that, despite DSG’s contentions, remains a means of
6
communication even “in this century.” See id.; see also MCL § 21.321 (noting opt-out method
7
should be “simple”). Although other opt-out procedures may be made available to the extent
8
practicable, DSG has not shown permitting class members to opt-out only through U.S. Mail
9
violates due process considerations or inadequately serves the purpose of “insur[ing] that the
10
judgment, whether favorable or not, would bind all class members who did not request exclusion
11
from the suit . . . .” See Eisen, 417 U.S. at 177. Accordingly, the court finds notice by U.S. Mail
12
is sufficient and rejects DSG’s contention the court must order plaintiff to provide electronic opt-
13
out methods.
14
Nonetheless, DSG obtained a $300 estimate from CPT to provide an email opt-out
15
method, and DSG offers to pay the $300 cost. See DSG Green Decl., ECF No. 56-2; Opp’n at 13
16
n.6. At hearing, plaintiff’s counsel confirmed plaintiff does not object to including an email opt-
17
out option if DSG pays the associated costs, and DSG reaffirmed its willingness to pay
18
CPT’s$300 fee. While the email opt-out method is not required, the court finds no reason to
19
refuse such a method when the parties agree in this way.
20
Accordingly, in addition to submitting a signed opt-out form by U.S. Mail, class
21
members may opt out through a secure email allowing verification that the person opting out is
22
the potential class member associated with the email. The class notice should reflect these
23
options and remove reference to all other opt-out methods not approved by the court.
24
IV.
25
MEET AND CONFER ORDER
The parties are ORDERED to meet and confer to implement changes required in
26
this order and jointly file an updated class notice and opt-out form incorporating the court’s
27
required changes within fourteen days of this order. In addition, the filing may include each
28
/////
11
1
party’s objections, if any, to the court’s revisions. Any such objections should be explained
2
concisely and should not be filed as a formal brief.
3
After receiving and reviewing the parties’ joint filing, the court will issue an order
4
noting additional changes, if any, approving the notice and issuing a notice plan. As discussed at
5
hearing, DSG should be prepared to provide class information within ten days of the court’s order
6
approving the notice and issuing a notice plan.
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: February 7, 2018.
9
10
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
12
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?