Beauperthuy et al v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. et al

Filing 580

ORDER by Judge Samuel Conti granting #569 Motion for Settlement; granting #572 Motion for Attorney Fees (sclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/10/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6

THOMAS G. FOLEY, JR., Bar No. 065812
JUSTIN P. KARCZAG, Bar No. 223764
FOLEY BEZEK BEHLE & CURTIS, LLP
15 West Carrillo Street
Santa Barbara, California 93101
Telephone [phone]
Facsimile [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

RICHARD E. DONAHOO, Bar No. 186957
SARAH L. KOKONAS, Bar No.
DONAHOO & ASSOCIATES
440 W. First Street, Ste. 101
Tustin, CA 92780
Telephone [phone]
Facsimile [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17
18

GABE BEAUPERTHUY, et al.,

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Plaintiffs,
v.
24 HOUR FITNESS USA, INC., a
California corporation dba 24 HOUR
FITNESS; SPORT AND FITNESS
CLUBS OF AMERICA, INC., a
California corporation dba 24 HOUR
FITNESS,
Defendants.

Case No. C 06 0715 SC
(Assigned to the Honorable Samuel Conti
for All Purposes)
[PROPOSED] ORDER ON MOTION
FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF
SETTLEMENT AND MOTION FOR
ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
Date:
September 13, 2013
Time:
10:00 am
Courtroom: 1

27
28

Complaint filed:
Trial date:
1

February 1, 2006
N/A
USDC, ND, Case No.: C 06 0715 SC

ORDER ON MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL AND MOTION FOR ATTOREYS’ FEES AND COSTS

1

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Final Approval

2
3

of a Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) Settlement.

4

The proposed settlement in this case was preliminarily approved by this

5

Court on April 22, 2013 (“Preliminary Approval Order”) (Dkt. No. 568). Pursuant

6

to the Court’s Preliminary Approval Order and the Notice provided to the

7

individual plaintiffs, the Court conducted a fairness hearing on September 13,

8

2013. The Court has reviewed the materials submitted by the parties, and has

9

heard arguments presented at such hearing. For the reasons cited on the record as

10

well as those stated hereafter, the Court finds and orders as follows:

11

1.

12

U.S.C. §201 et seq.

13

2.

14

material elements of the proposed settlement, constituted the best notice

15

practicable under the circumstances, constituted valid, due and sufficient notice

16

and complied with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the United States

17

Constitution.

18

3.

19

under the FLSA. The Settlement Amount will provide a substantial benefit to the

20

plaintiffs. The agreement is not the product of fraud or collusion between the

21

negotiating parties, and the settlement, taken as a whole, is fair, reasonable, and

22

adequate to all concerned. The uncertainty and delay of further litigation strongly

23

support the reasonableness and adequacy of the Settlement.

24

4.

25

objected to any aspect of the proposed settlement. Of the 862 individuals who are

26

named as parties to the settlement, 851 have signed individual releases approving

27

the settlement. The reaction of the plaintiffs to the proposed Settlement strongly

28

supports the conclusion that the proposed Settlement is fair, reasonable, and

The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 29
The notice given to the individual plaintiffs informed the plaintiffs of the

The Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate in all respects

The Settlement has received overwhelming approval.

2

No plaintiff has

USDC, ND, Case No.: C 06 0715 SC

ORDER ON MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL AND MOTION FOR ATTOREYS’ FEES AND COSTS

1

adequate. Accordingly, the Court hereby grants final approval of the Settlement

2

and orders the parties to comply with the terms of the Settlement Agreement.

3

5.

4

approves payment to Plaintiffs’ counsel of attorneys’ fees in the amount of

5

$5,479,677 and litigation costs in the amount of $1,009,469 from the Settlement

6

Amount.

7

Simpluris.

8

6.

9

Parties and Plaintiffs, to the fullest extent to enforce and effectuate the terms and

The Court grants the motion for attorneys’ fees as fair and reasonable and

The Court approves $65,000 in Settlement administration costs to

The Court shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the action and over all

10

intent of the Settlement Agreement.

11

7.

12

have signed the Individual Release Agreements that are the subject of the

13

Settlement Agreement are hereby dismissed with prejudice.

All actions and claims for relief brought by the individual plaintiffs who

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17

Date:

18

Hon. Samuel Conti

19

United States District Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

USDC, ND, Case No.: C 06 0715 SC

ORDER ON MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL AND MOTION FOR ATTOREYS’ FEES AND COSTS