Rieckborn v. Velti plc et al

Filing 131

ORDER CONCERNING 109 MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF PARTIAL SETTLEMENT -The lead plaintiff should submit any supporting documentation and provide any other information that may be relevant to the determination of whether the proposed settlem ent is fair, reasonable, and adequate by July 22, 2014. If the information will be submitted primarily in the form of a brief, the brief shall not exceed 15 pages. Supporting declarations and exhibits, if any, shall not exceed 25 pages in total. The proponents of the settlement should also file revised Claims and Notice forms by July 22, 2014. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 07/08/2014. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/8/2014)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

ANIKA R. RIECKBORN, et al.,

Case No. 13-cv-03889-WHO

Plaintiffs,
8
v.
9
10

VELTI PLC, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER CONCERNING MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF
PARTIAL SETTLEMENT
Re: Dkt. No. 109

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

On May 23, 2014, lead plaintiff Bobby Yadegar/Ygar Capital LLC filed a motion for

14

preliminary approval of a partial settlement between it and the other plaintiffs (St. Paul Teachers’

15

Retirement Fund Association, Newport News Employees’ Retirement Fund, and Plaintiff

16

Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System) and defendants Velti plc, Wilson W.

17

Cheung, Jeffrey G. Ross, Winnie W. Tso, and Nicholas P. Negroponte. On July 7, 2014, I held a

18

hearing on the motion.

19

My duty is to determine whether the proposed settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate.

20

See FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2). At the hearing, I raised a number of questions about the settlement

21

amount of $9.5 million (which includes attorney’s fees, costs, and administrator’s costs) that were

22

not adequately addressed in the papers or during the argument. As a result, I need additional

23

information to determine whether the proposed fund is or is not within an appropriate range.

24

I will allow the lead plaintiff to supplement the motion to address some or all of the

25

concerns listed below. To be clear, I do not expect the lead plaintiff to provide a formal damages

26

assessment, but I do expect more than conclusory and formulaic explanations. I am interested in:

27

(i) what factors the lead plaintiff considered in deciding to settle or litigate; (ii) what damages it

28

estimated this case involved at the time of the complaint’s filing and how that determination was

1

reached, as well as subsequent modifications of that estimate and how those determinations were

2

reached; (iii) what the relative proportion of liability is for the various defendants (or groups of

3

defendants), both settling and non-settling; (iv) what litigation risks there are (i.e., what facts and

4

legal arguments are strong or weak for the plaintiffs and defendants, settling and non-settling),

5

how they weigh, and how the lead plaintiff assessed them; (v) why certain defendants have not

6

been served, what efforts have been made to serve them, and why additional efforts were not

7

made; (vi) the financial status of, and the likelihood of collection from, each of the defendants,

8

both settling and non-settling, and how that likelihood was determined; and (vii) what discovery

9

has been conducted, formal and informal, and how that discovery affected the decision to settle. I
also wonder why electronic submission of claims is not an option for the class if I grant

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

preliminary approval of the settlement.

12

The lead plaintiff should submit any supporting documentation and provide any other

13

information that may be relevant to my determination of whether the proposed settlement is fair,

14

reasonable, and adequate by July 22, 2014. If the information will be submitted primarily in the

15

form of a brief, the brief shall not exceed 15 pages. Supporting declarations and exhibits, if any,

16

shall not exceed 25 pages in total. Given that this filing will focus on the fairness, adequacy and

17

reasonability of the amount of the settlement, no response from any defendant is necessary. The

18

proponents of the settlement should also file revised Claims and Notice forms, as discussed at the

19

hearing, by July 22, 2014 as well.

20

There are a number of other issues that the parties have briefed and argued concerning

21

whether the settlement is fair, adequate and reasonable. I will address those issues and the

22

settlement value in one order after receiving the briefing described above.

23
24
25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 8, 2014
______________________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge

27
28
2