Downs et al v. U.S. Foodservice Inc

Filing 65

ORDER Re Questions for March 16, 2012 Oral Argument. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/13/2012. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/13/2012)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

LORETTA DOWNS, et al.,

9

Plaintiffs,

10

v.

ORDER RE QUESTIONS FOR MARCH
16, 2012 ORAL ARGUMENT

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

No. C-10-2163 EMC

U.S. FOODSERVICE, INC.,

12

Defendant.
___________________________________/

13
14
15

Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary approval of settlement is set for hearing Friday, March 16,

16

2012. Docket No. 50. The parties shall be prepared to discuss and present additional evidence if

17

necessary on the following questions:

18

1.

What is the basis for the 85%-15% split between the two funds? How many

19

members of the class are eligible for each fund? What is the projected average

20

recovery for class members in each fund?

21

2.

If there is concern about retaliation, why should current employees hired after

22

October 2010 (or is it 2011?) and those who are Nevada/Arizona Drivers be required

23

to file a claim?

24

3.

25

How should conflicts between the settlement agreement and notice as to whom
objections and opt outs should be sent be resolved?

26

///

27

///

28

///

1
2

4.

Aside from mailed notices, should there be supplemental means of giving class notice
(Internet, publication, etc.)?

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5
6

Dated: March 13, 2012

7
_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2