Barnes v. AT&T Pension Benefit Plan-NonBargained Program

Filing 336

ORDER re Proposed Class Notice Language. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 12/18/2012. (emclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/18/2012)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

QUILLER BARNES,

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No. C-08-4058 EMC

Plaintiff,
ORDER RE PROPOSED CLASS
NOTICE LANGUAGE

v.
AT&T PENSION BENEFIT PLAN NONBARGAINED PROGRAM,

12
13

Defendant.
___________________________________/

14
15
16

Both parties have agreed that there should be a class notice. Furthermore, both parties have

17

now agreed as to the exact language of the class notice. See Docket No. 334 (joint letter). The

18

Court appreciates the time that counsel have spent negotiating that language. The Court has only

19

three concerns that the parties should be prepared to discuss at the hearing on December 21, 2012.

20

1.

21

In this section (found on page 2 of the notice), the answer to the question is, in effect: “The

22

Court ordered that this Notice be sent to inform Class Members of developments in the lawsuit that

23

may impact their rights.” At the very least, this language should be bolded to draw the attention of

24

the class member.

25

Why did I get this Notice?

In addition, arguably, the language should be modified so that more specifics are provided

26

about the developments. Proposed language is as follows: “The Court ordered that this Notice be

27

sent to inform Class Members of developments in the lawsuit that may impact their rights.

28

This includes a decision by the Court rejecting one of the class claims (which Plaintiff intends

1

to appeal) and a decision by Plaintiff not to pursue two claims (one an uncertified class claim

2

and one a certified class claim). If you wish to intervene to pursue the claims that Plaintiff has

3

decided not to pursue, you will need to do so by [date].”

4

8.

5

The second paragraph in this section (page 3 of the notice) states that “Plaintiff may ask the

How will the lawyers be paid?

6

Court to award attorneys’ fees and expenses against Defendant. Any such award will be paid by the

7

Defendant and will not be paid by the Class.” The notice arguably should be re-worded to make

8

clear that an award will not be paid directly by the class (consistent with the sentence in the first

9

paragraph that “all attorneys’ fees and expenses are payable only out of money recovered for the
Class or directly by Defendant to the extent ordered by the Court”).

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

9.

12

The last paragraph of this section (page 4 of the notice) notes that “[y]ou may seek to

What do I need to do?

13

intervene in this action.” The parties should include in the notice a specific date by which

14

intervention is required.

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
18

Dated: December 18, 2012

19

_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2