Dietrick v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc.

Filing 163

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 162 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER FOR APPROVAL OF REVISED CLASS NOTICE AND MAILING DATE filed by Michael Deatrick. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on May 18, 2016. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/18/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

EDUARDO G. ROY (Bar No. 146316)
JOHN R. HURLEY (Bar no. 203641)
PROMETHEUS PARTNERS L.L.P.
220 Montgomery Street Suite 1094
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
MICHAEL DEATRICK, et al.
SHERRY B. SHAVIT, ESQ.; STATE BAR NO.: 193222
E-mail: [e-mail]
STUART E. COHEN, ESQ.; STATE BAR NO.: 213810
E-mail: [e-mail]
THARPE & HOWELL, LLP
15250 Ventura Blvd., Ninth Floor
Sherman Oaks, California 91403
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
J. KEVIN LILLY, ESQ.; STATE BAR NO.: 119981
E-mail: [e-mail]
LITTLER MENDELSON PC
2049 Century Park East, 5th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant,
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES USA, INC.

17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

18

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

19
20
21

MICHAEL DEATRICK, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, and as
representative of the State of California, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

22
23
24
25

Case No.: 3:13-cv-5016 JST
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER FOR APPROVAL OF REVISED
CLASS NOTICE AND MAILING DATE

v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES USA,
INC.,
Defendant.

26
27
28
1

STIPULATION FOR APPROVAL OF REVISED
CLASS NOTICE AND MAILING DATE
Case No.: 3:13-cv-5016 JST

1

Plaintiff Michael Deatrick, individually and as representative of the conditionally-certified

2

settlement class, the FLSA opt-in plaintiffs and Defendant Securitas Security Services USA, Inc.

3

(“Defendant”) hereby stipulate and request that the Court approve a revision to the Class Notice

4

approved by the Court in its ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF

5

AMENDED SETTLEMENT [“Preliminary Approval Order”] (ECF No. 161). Although the Parties do

6

not believe that the proposed revision is material, it does reflect a change to the Class Notice approved

7

by the Court, and the proposed change necessitates a different mailing date. The Parties therefore jointly

8

request approval of a revised Class Notice and mailing date for the reasons set forth herein.

9
10

Reasons for the Requested Relief
1. In bring his Motion for Conditional Class Certification and Preliminary Approval of

11

Settlement (ECF No. 152) and Motion for Preliminary Approval of Amended Settlement and

12

Modification of End-Date of Settlement Class (ECF No. 156), Plaintiff represented that 11,267 persons

13

(in addition to those California employees who had already opted in) would be included in the

14

conditionally-certified California Class. See, e.g., Declaration of John R. Hurley (ECF 156-5 at ¶ 20.

15

Based on this figure and the number of persons who had already opted in to the FLSA collective action,

16

it was anticipated that the settlement would provide payment to a total of 35,548 persons.

17

2. Based on the sum of $1,385,000 allocated to individual settlement awards under the

18

proposed settlement, the average pretax payment to class members would be approximately $38.96.

19

Pursuant to the Preliminary Approval Order, this figure would be disclosed in the Class Notice. (ECF

20

161 at p. 10:2-6; ECF 156-2 at p. 2 § 4.)

21

3.

Upon issuance of the Preliminary Approval Order, Defendant Securitas USA worked

22

diligently to generate and provide a class list to the settlement administrator as required by the Court’s

23

Order, and provided an initial class list to the settlement administrator on April 28, 2016.

24

4. Based on the number of persons on the initial class list, Plaintiffs’ counsel raised

25

concerns regarding the methodology used to generate the list. The Parties met and conferred repeatedly

26

regarding those concerns in order to ensure that the class list properly encompassed the conditionally-

27

certified California settlement class. These efforts resulted in two further iterations of the class list.

28

5. The Parties are in agreement that the third and final iteration of the class list properly
2

STIPULATION FOR APPROVAL OF REVISED
CLASS NOTICE AND MAILING DATE
Case No.: 3:13-cv-5016 JST

1

encompasses the conditionally-certified California Class. This final list was provided to the settlement

2

administrator on May 10, 2016.

3

6. Based on the final class list, notice would be sent to a slightly higher number of persons

4

than originally anticipated. Specifically, the FLSA collective action and the California Class would

5

together encompass 36,092 unique persons rather than the 35,548 persons previously anticipated. Based

6

on this figure, the average pre-tax settlement share would be approximately $38.37 rather than the figure

7

of $38.96 previously anticipated.

8
9
10

7. The Parties, and specifically Plaintiff and his counsel, believe that this $0.59 decrease in
the average settlement amount is not material and that the average settlement amount remains reasonable
under the circumstances.

11

8. Further, because of the time required to meet and confer and generate multiple iterations

12

of the class list, the settlement administrator was unable to send Class Notice by May 7, 2016, which

13

was the date by which Class Notice should have been sent pursuant to the Preliminary Approval Order.

14

The settlement administrator has advised the Parties that Class Notice can be sent by the new requested

15

date of May 20, 2016.

16

Effect on Final Approval

17

The Court has scheduled a hearing date of September 22, 2016, for final approval. The new

18

requested notice date would not require any continuance of that date.

19

STIPULATION

20

Based on the matters set forth above, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AND REQUEST,

21
22

by and through their respective counsel, as follows:
•

That the Court modify the date for mailing of Class Notice set pursuant to its

23

Preliminary Approval Order such that Class Notice shall be mailed on or before May

24

20, 2016; and

25

•

That the Court approve the mailing of a form of Class Notice which changes the

26

estimated average settlement amount from the $38.96 figure in the previously-

27

approved form of notice (ECF 156-2 at p. 2 § 4) to $38.37.

28

Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), the undersigned filer of this document hereby attests that
3

STIPULATION FOR APPROVAL OF REVISED
CLASS NOTICE AND MAILING DATE
Case No.: 3:13-cv-5016 JST

1

concurrence in the filing has been obtained from each of the other signatories, which shall serve in lieu

2

of their signatures on the document.

3

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

4 Dated: May 12, 2016
5

LITTLER MENDELSON PC
J. KEVIN LILLY
THARPE & HOWELL, LLP

6
7

By: /s/ Sherry B. Shavit
SHERRY B. SHAVIT
Attorneys for Defendant,
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES USA,
INC.

8
9
10
11

Dated: May 12, 2016

12

PROMETHEUS PARTNERS L.L.P.
By: /s/ John R. Hurley
JOHN R. HURLEY
Attorneys for Plaintiffs,
MICHAEL DEATRICK, et al.

13
14
15
16
17
18

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
20
21
22
23

DATED: May 18, 2016

___________________________
HON. JON S. TIGAR
United States District Court Judge

24
25
26
27
28
4

STIPULATION FOR APPROVAL OF REVISED
CLASS NOTICE AND MAILING DATE
Case No.: 3:13-cv-5016 JST