State of Florida, Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs v. AU Optronics Corporation et al

Filing 230

ORDER granting Stipulation Filed in MDL Master Case by Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs' and State Attorneys General's Joint Report of Settlement Fund Distribution and Request for an Order Authorizing Distribution of Residual Amounts, MDL D.E. 9498. Signed by Judge Susan Illston on 1/4/16. (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/4/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Craig C. Corbitt (83251) Judith A. Zahid (215418) Qianwei Fu (242669) Heather T. Rankie (268002) ZELLE HOFMANN VOELBEL & MASON LLP 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 3400 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 693-0700 Facsimile: (415) 693-0770 ccorbitt@zelle.com Francis O. Scarpulla (41059) LAW OFFICES OF FRANCIS O. SCARPULLA 456 Montgomery Street, 17th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 788-7210 Facsimile: (415) 788-0706 fos@scarpullalaw.com Joseph M. Alioto (42680) Theresa D. Moore (99978) ALIOTO LAW FIRM 225 Bush Street, 16th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 434-8900 Facsimile: (415) 434-9200 jmalioto@aliotolaw.com 8 Co-Lead Class Counsel for Indirect-Purchaser Plaintiffs 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 IN RE TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION ) ) ) ) ) This Document Relates to: ) ) Indirect-Purchaser Class Action; ) ) State of Missouri, et al. v. AU Optronics ) Corporation, et al., Case No. 10-cv-3619; ) State of Florida v. AU Optronics Corporation, ) ) et al., Case No. 10-cv-3517; and ) ) State of New York v. AU Optronics ) Corporation, et al., Case No. 11-cv-0711. ) ) Case No. 3:07-MD-1827 SI MDL No. 1827 [PROPOSED] ORDER AUTHORIZING DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUAL SETTLEMENT FUNDS The Honorable Susan Illston 23 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER AUTHORIZING DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUAL SETTLEMENT FUNDS 1 The Court, having reviewed the joint status report and recommendation submitted by 2 Class Counsel for the Indirect-Purchaser Plaintiffs and the Attorneys General of the States of 3 Arkansas, California, Florida, Michigan, Missouri, New York, West Virginia, and Wisconsin 4 (“Settling States”), and good cause appearing, hereby ORDERS: 5 6 7 8 9 1. Rust shall make a total additional distribution of $2,125,026.74 to timely-filed but underpaid or unpaid claims as specified in paragraph 9 of Rust’s declaration; 2. Rust shall distribute payments to the 119 claims with claims that were filed between June 7, 2014 and October 6, 2014 at the pro rata amount of $4.57 per panel equivalent. 3. Rust shall promptly distribute the remaining shares of the uncashed payments to 10 eligible claimants and void all uncashed payments 30 (thirty) days after final reissuance of 11 payments are mailed. 12 13 4. The following amounts may be deducted from each settling defendant’s Settlement Fund to pay Rust’s costs of claims administration: 14 Chimei 15 Chunghwa $2,483.93 16 Epson $1,334.41 17 HannStar $12,009.70 18 Hitachi $18,249.70 19 Samsung 20 Sharp $54,078.78 21 AUO $75,616.65 22 LG 23 Toshiba $9,832.51 24 TOTAL $506,634.18 25 5. $51,631.57 $112,371.48 $169,025.45 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. shall wire $506,634.18 to the following account: 26 Bank of Texas 27 ABA/Routing # 111014325 28 Account # 8093434387 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER AUTHORIZING DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUAL SETTLEMENT FUNDS 1 Account Name: Rust Consulting 2 Reference # 128325 3 Federal Tax ID # 41-1813634 4 Bank Contact: Mayra Landeros, (214) 987-8817 5 6 The balance of funds in the demand-deposit account, if any, shall be retained for additional costs as they are incurred. 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 10 Dated: 1/4/16 , 2015 Hon. Susan Illston United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 3267939 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 [PROPOSED] ORDER AUTHORIZING DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDUAL SETTLEMENT FUNDS

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?