Blouin v. Comcast Corp.
Filing
50
ORDER RE FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT re 46 Stipulation filed by Shawn Blouin. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 6/9/2011. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/9/2011)
6
Ira Spiro (State Bar No. 67641)
ira@spiromoss.com
H. Scott Leviant (State Bar No. 200834)
scott@spiromoss.com
Linh Hua (State Bar No. 247419)
linh@spiromoss.com
SPIRO MOSS LLP
11377 W. Olympic Blvd., 5th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90064-1683
Telephone: (310) 235-2468
Facsimile: (310) 235-2456
7
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
8
Daryl S. Landy (State Bar No. 136288)
dlandy@morganlewis.com
Theresa Mak (State Bar No. 211435)
tmak@morganlewis.com
MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
2 Palo Alto Square
3000 El Camino Real, Suite 700
Palo Alto, CA 94306
Telephone: (650) 843-4000
Facsimile: (650) 843-4001
1
2
3
4
5
9
10
11
Spiro Moss llp
12
13
Attorneys for Defendant
14
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
18
SHAWN BLOUIN, individually, and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,
19
20
21
Plaintiffs,
vs.
COMCAST CORP.,
22
Defendant.
23
24
Case No.: 3:08-CV-04787-MEJ
STIPULATION FOR FINAL
APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION
SETTLEMENT AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER THEREON
Date Action Filed: September 17, 2008
Date Removed: October 17, 2008
Trial Date:
None
25
26
27
28
DB2/22486124.1
Page 1
STIPULATION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
1
STIPULATION
2
This Stipulation is entered into by and between Plaintiff Shawn Blouin
3
(“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Comcast Corp. (“Defendant”), based upon the
4
following facts, as well as the concurrently-filed Declarations Eric Springer of
5
Simpluris, Inc. and H. Scott Leviant:
6
7
8
1.
On January 31, 2011, Plaintiff filed his Motion for Preliminary
Approval of Class Action Settlement and noticed a hearing date of March 10, 2011.
2.
On February 1, 2011, Chris Nathan, Law Clerk to Hon. Marie-Elena
9
James, advised that if the parties agree to the terms of the settlement and believe a
10
hearing is unnecessary the Court prefers for the parties to enter into stipulations for
11
both preliminary and final approval, in lieu of briefing and setting a hearing date.
Spiro Moss llp
12
3.
The parties fully executed the Joint Stipulation of Settlement and Class
13
Action Release on January 20, 2011, and both parties are in agreement as to the
14
terms of the settlement as set forth therein. The Joint Stipulation of Settlement and
15
Class Action executed by the parties is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
16
4.
On February 3, 2011, the Court granted preliminary approval of the
17
proposed class action settlement under the terms set forth in the Joint Stipulation of
18
Settlement and Class Action.
19
5.
Both parties agree that final approval of this settlement as set forth in
20
the Joint Stipulation of Settlement and Class Action should be granted, as the
21
settlement terms are fair, reasonable and adequate under Federal Rule of Civil
22
Procedure 23(e) and the class reaction has been positive in that (1) there are no
23
known objections, (2) there is only one known opt-out, and (3) well over 60% of
24
the available work weeks have been claimed by class members.
25
26
27
28
6.
Both parties believe that a hearing regarding final approval is
unnecessary.
7.
Both parties believe that a hearing regarding an award of attorney’s
fees, costs and class representative enhancement award is unnecessary, given that
DB2/22486124.1
Page 2
STIPULATION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
1
the class has had ample opportunity to access Plaintiff’s Motion for Fees, Costs and
2
Enhancement Award, and object to those requested awards but did not do so.
3
Based on the foregoing, the parties stipulate as follows:
4
1.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
The parties’ Joint Stipulation of Class Action Settlement and Release
should be finally approved;
2.
The Court should enter the [Proposed] Order for Final Approval of
Class Action Settlement, submitted concurrently herewith; and
3.
The Court should enter the [Proposed] Order for and Award of
Attorney’s Fees, Costs and Enhancement Award, filed with the Court on or about
March 3, 2011.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Respectfully submitted,
Spiro Moss llp
12
13
Dated: June 8, 2011
SPIRO MOSS LLP
14
By:
15
16
17
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
18
19
H
Ira Spiro
H. Scott Leviant1
Linh Hua
Dated: June 8, 2011
MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
20
21
By: /s/ Theresa Mak, by permission
Daryl S. Landy
Theresa Mak
22
23
Attorneys for Defendant
24
25
26
27
28
1
The filing attorney hereby attests that he will maintain on file all holograph
signatures for any signatures indicated by a "conformed" signature (/S/) within this
e-filed document.
DB2/22486124.1
Page 3
STIPULATION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
1
ORDER
2
The parties in the above-captioned case entered into a Stipulation for Final
3
Approval of Class Action Settlement. After considering the Stipulation, the facts
4
upon which the Stipulation is based, and good cause appearing, it is hereby
5
ORDERED:
6
7
8
9
10
11
The parties’ Joint Stipulation of Class Action Settlement and Release,
1.
attached hereto as Exhibit 1, is finally approved;
The Order for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement, submitted
2.
concurrently with the filing of the Stipulation, is entered; and
The [Proposed] Order for and Award of Attorney’s Fees, Costs and
3.
Enhancement Award, filed with the Court on or about March 1, 2011, is entered.
Spiro Moss llp
12
13
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
14
15
16
Dated:
June 9, 2011
17
18
Hon. Maria-Elena James
CHIEF MAGISTRATE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
JUDGE
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DB2/22486124.1
Page 4
STIPULATION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
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?