Larkin v. Yelp! Inc.

Filing 54

Proposed Order re 53 Motion Hearing,, PROPOSED JUDGMENT by Ahmad Deanes, Justin Larkin, Anthony Tijerino. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order PROPOSED ORDER DETERMINING GOOD FAITH AND GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT)(Rukin, Peter) (Filed on 12/3/2012)

1
2
3
4
5

Peter Rukin (SBN 178336)
RUKIN HYLAND DORIA & TINDALL LLP
100 Pine Street, Suite 2150
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

8

Rosa Vigil-Gallenberg (SBN 251872)
GALLENBERG PC
9701 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1000
Beverly Hills, CA 90071
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

9

Attorneys for Representative Plaintiffs

6
7

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

MALCOLM A. HEINICKE (SBN 194174)
[e-mail]
CAROLYN V. ZABRYCKI (SBN 263541)
[e-mail]
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
560 Mission Street
Twenty-Seventh Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2907
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
YELP! INC.

17
18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

20

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

21
22

JUSTIN LARKIN, ANTHONY TIJERINO, and Case No. 3:11-cv-01503-EMC
AHMAD DEANES, on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated,
[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT

23
24
25
26

Plaintiffs,
v.
Judge:
YELP! INC.,
Defendant.

27
28
Case No. 3:11-cv-01503-EMC

Honorable Edward M. Chen

1

This matter came on for hearing upon the joint application of the Settling Parties for

2

approval of the settlement set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement (the “Stipulation”). Due

3

and adequate notice having been given to the California Class and the National Class, and the

4

Court having considered the Stipulation, all papers filed and proceedings had herein, and all

5

oral and written comments received regarding the proposed settlement, and having reviewed

6

the record in this Litigation, and good cause appearing,

7

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS:

8
9
10

1.

The Court, for purposes of this Judgment, adopts all defined terms as set

forth in the Stipulation Re: Settlement of Class and Collective Actions (“Stipulation”) filed in
this case.

11

2.

The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Litigation and

12

the Class Representatives, the Members of the California Settlement Class, the Members of the

13

National Settlement Class, and Yelp.

14

3.

The Court finds that the distribution of the California Notice and the

15

National Notice as provided for in the Order Granting Preliminary Approval and Settlement

16

Hearing, constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances to all Persons within

17

the definition of the California Class and National Class, and fully met the requirements of due

18

process under the United States Constitution and California law. Based on evidence and other

19

material submitted in conjunction with the Settlement Hearing, the actual notices to the

20

California Class and National Class were adequate. The Court further finds that Yelp has

21

satisfied the requirements of notice to pertinent government agencies set forth in the federal

22

Class Action Fairness Act of 2005.

23
24

4.

The Court finds that the instant Litigation presented a good faith dispute

over the payment of wages, and the Court finds in favor of settlement approval.

25

5.

The Court approves the settlement of the above-captioned action, as set

26

forth in the Stipulation, each of the releases and other terms, as fair, just, reasonable, and

27

adequate as to the Settling Parties. The Settling Parties are directed to perform in accordance

28
16620979.2

-1-

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
Case No. 11-CV-01503 EMC

1

with the terms set forth in the Stipulation.

2

6.

Except as to any individual claim of those Persons (identified in

3

Attachment A hereto) who have validly and timely requested exclusion from the California

4

Settlement Class, all of the California Released Claims are dismissed with prejudice as to Class

5

Representatives Justin Larkin and Anthony Tijerino, and the other Members of the California

6

Class. The Settling Parties are to bear their own costs, except as otherwise provided in the

7

Stipulation.

8
9
10

7.

All of the National Released Claims are dismissed with prejudice as to

the Class Representatives and the other Members of the National Settlement Class. The
Settling Parties are to bear their own costs, except as otherwise provided in the Stipulation.

11

8.

Solely for purposes of effectuating this settlement, this Court has

12

certified a class of all Members of the California Settlement Class, as that term is defined in

13

and by the terms of the Stipulation, and the Court deems this definition sufficient for purposes

14

of due process and Rule 23.

15

9.

With respect to the California Settlement Class and for purposes of

16

approving this settlement only, this Court finds and concludes that: (a) the Members of the

17

California Settlement Class are ascertainable and so numerous that joinder of all members is

18

impracticable; (b) there are questions of law or fact common to the California Settlement Class,

19

and there is a well-defined community of interest among Members of the California Settlement

20

Class with respect to the subject matter of the Litigation; (c) the claims of the Class

21

Representatives are typical of the claims of the Members of the California Settlement Class;

22

(d) the Class Representatives have fairly and adequately protected the interests of the

23

California Members of the Settlement Class; (e) a class action is superior to other available

24

methods for an efficient adjudication of this controversy; and (f) the counsel of record for the

25

Class Representatives, i.e., Class Counsel, are qualified to serve as counsel for the plaintiff in

26

his individual and representative capacities and for the California Settlement Class.

27
28
16620979.2

-2-

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
Case No. 11-CV-01503 EMC

1

10.

Solely for purposes of effectuating this settlement, this Court has

2

certified a collective action class of all Members of the National Settlement Class, as that term

3

is defined in and by the terms of the Stipulation, and the Court deems this definition sufficient

4

for purposes of due process and 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).

5

11.

With respect to the National Settlement Class and for purposes of

6

approving this settlement only, this Court finds and concludes that: the National Settlement

7

Class meets the requirements for certification as a collective action class under 29 U.S.C. §

8

216(b) because the National Settlement Class Members are similarly situated.

9

12.

By this Judgment, the Class Representatives shall release, relinquish,

10

and discharge, and each of the California Settlement Class Members shall be deemed to have,

11

and by operation of the Judgment shall have, fully, finally, and forever released, relinquished,

12

and discharged all California Released Claims (including Unknown Claims).

13

13.

By this Judgment, the Class Representatives shall release, relinquish,

14

and discharge, and each of the National Settlement Class Members shall be deemed to have,

15

and by operation of the Judgment shall have, fully, finally, and forever released, relinquished,

16

and discharged all National Released Claims (including Unknown Claims).

17

14.

This Litigation is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

18

15.

Neither the Stipulation nor the settlement contained therein, nor any act

19

performed or document executed pursuant to or in furtherance of the Stipulation or the

20

settlement: (i) is or may be deemed to be or may be used as an admission of, or evidence of,

21

the validity of any California Released Claim or National Released Claim, or of any

22

wrongdoing or liability of Yelp; or (ii) is or may be deemed to be or may be used as an

23

admission of, or evidence of, any fault or omission of Yelp in any civil, criminal, or

24

administrative proceeding in any court, administrative agency, or other tribunal. In the event

25

that the Effective Date does not occur, Yelp shall not be estopped or otherwise precluded from

26

contesting class or collective action certification in the Litigation on any grounds. Yelp may

27

file the Stipulation and/or the Judgment from this Litigation in any other action that may be

28
16620979.2

-3-

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
Case No. 11-CV-01503 EMC

1

brought against them in order to support a defense or counterclaim based on principles of res

2

judicata, collateral estoppel, release, good faith settlement, judgment bar, or reduction or any

3

theory of claim preclusion or issue preclusion or similar defense or counterclaim.

4

16.

The only California Settlement Class Members entitled to payment

5

pursuant to this Judgment are California Participating Claimants, and the only National

6

Settlement Class Members entitled to payment are National Participating Claimants. Neither

7

the Stipulation nor this Judgment will result in the creation of any unpaid residue or residual,

8

and any funds that would have been paid to California Class Members and National Class

9

Members had they become California Participating Claimants and National Participating

10

Claimants that are not claimed shall remain the property of Yelp.

11

17.

Yelp has agreed to pay Class Counsel their reasonable attorney fees in

12

this matter in the total combined, gross amount of $205,000 as well as certain allowable costs

13

in this matter up to the gross amount of $9,461.62, Yelp has agreed to pay $7,500 to the

14

California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA), Yelp will pay $16,000 to

15

Simpluris, Inc. for settlement administrative expenses, and Yelp has agreed to pay an

16

enhancement award of $5,000 to each of the Class Representatives to reimburse them for their

17

unique services and execution of general releases. The Court finds that these agreements are

18

fair and reasonable. Yelp is directed to make such payments in accordance with the terms of

19

the Stipulation.

20

18.

The Court reserves exclusive and continuing jurisdiction over the

21

Litigation, the Counterclaim, the Class Representatives, the California Settlement Class, the

22

National Settlement Class and Yelp for the purposes of supervising the implementation,

23

enforcement, construction, administration and interpretation of the Stipulation and this

24

Judgment.

25

//

26

//

27

//

28
16620979.2

-4-

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
Case No. 11-CV-01503 EMC

1

19.

This document shall constitute a judgment (and separate document

2

constituting said judgment) for purposes of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5

DATED: _____________________

6

_______________________________
The Honorable Edward M. Chen
United States District Court Judge

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
16620979.2

-5-

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
Case No. 11-CV-01503 EMC

ATTACHMENT A

November 30, 2012

Larkin v. Yelp! Inc.
Case No. 11-CV-01503 EMC
United States District Court for the Northern District of California

The following two individuals timely requested exclusion from this settlement in Larkin v. Yelp,
Case No. 11-CV-01503 EMC

SIMID 478
SIMID 818

Jane Kwett
Matthew Timberlake

If you have any additional questions, you may contact the Claims Administrator, toll-free, at
1-888-369-3780, or by mail addressed to:

Larkin v. Yelp
c/o Simpluris, Inc.
P. O. Box 26170
Santa Ana, CA 92799