Simril v. TVI, Inc.
ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT 32 . (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 4/17/2017)
1 JAMES KAWAHITO (SBN 234851)
KAWAHITO LAW GROUP APC
2 222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 2222
El Segundo, California 90245
3 Telephone: (310) 746-5300
Facsimile: (310) 593-2520
SAHAG MAJARAIN II (SBN 146621)
5 LAW OFFICES OF SAHAG MAJARIAN II
18250 Ventura Blvd.
6 Tarzana, CA 91356
Telephone: (818) 609-0807
7 Fax No.: (818) 609-0892
8 Attorneys for Plaintiff Clinton Simril and Class Members
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12 CLINTON SIMRIL, individually, and on
behalf of other members of the general public
[Honorable Judge Susan Illston, Courtroom 1,
ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY
APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION
CASE NO.: 16-CV-00817-SI
17 TVI, Inc., and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
Simril v. TVI, Inc.
Notice of Motion
ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF
CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
On April 14, 2017 the Court heard Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class
4 Action Settlement by Plaintiff Clinton Simril (“Plaintiff” or “Class Representative”), on behalf of
5 himself and all others similarly situated. The Motion is not opposed by Defendant TVI, Inc.
6 (“TVI”). The Court has considered the Joint Stipulation of Class Action Settlement and Release
7 (“Settlement Agreement”), the proposed Notice of Class Action Settlement (“Class Notice”) and
8 the Motion for Preliminary Approval and its attached forms, the submissions of counsel, and
9 hereby finds and Orders as follows:
Unless otherwise defined herein, all terms used in this Order (the “Preliminary
11 Approval Order”) will have the same meaning as defined in the Settlement Agreement.
The Court finds on a preliminary basis that the settlement memorialized in the
13 Settlement Agreement, filed with the Court, falls within the range of reasonableness and,
14 therefore, meets the requirements for preliminary approval.
Based on a review of the papers submitted by the parties, the Court finds that the
16 settlement is the result of arms-length negotiations conducted after Class Counsel adequately
17 investigated the claims and became familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of those claims.
18 The assistance of an experienced mediator in the settlement process supports the Court’s
19 conclusion that the settlement is non-collusive.
The Court conditionally finds that, for the purposes of approving this settlement
21 only, the proposed Class meets the requirements for certification of a settlement class under Rule
22 23(a) and 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: (a) the proposed Class is ascertainable
23 and so numerous that joinder of all members of the Class is impracticable; (b) there are questions
24 of law or fact common to the proposed Class; (c) certain claims of Plaintiff are typical of the
25 claims of the members of the proposed Class; (d) Plaintiff and their counsel will fairly and
26 adequately protect the interests of the proposed Class; and (e) a class action is superior to the other
27 available methods for an efficient resolution of this controversy. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 23
28 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court conditionally certifies, for settlement purposes
-1Simril v. TVI, Inc.
1 only (and for no other purpose and with no other effect upon this or any other action, including no
2 effect upon this action should the settlement not ultimately be approved), the following class: All
3 persons who worked for Defendant in California as a non-exempt employee from December 21,
4 2011 to the date of Preliminary Approval
For purposes of this Preliminary Approval Order, “Class Period” means the period
6 from December 21, 2011 through the date of preliminary approval.
If the settlement does not become final for any reason, the fact that the parties were
8 willing to stipulate to class certification as part of the Settlement shall have no bearing on, and will
9 not be admissible in connection with the issue of whether a class in this action should be certified
10 in a non-settlement context.
The Court’s conditional findings are limited solely to the claims brought on behalf
12 of the proposed Class. The Court’s findings are for purposes of conditionally certifying a Class
13 and will not have any claim or issue preclusion or estoppel effect in any other action against
14 Defendant or in this action if the settlement is not finally approved.
The Court appoints, for settlement purposes only, Plaintiff Clinton Simril as
16 representative for the claims against TVI.
The Court appoints, for settlement purposes only, Kawahito Law Group APC and
18 the Law Offices of Sahag Majarian II as “Class Counsel.”
The Court approves CPT Group, Inc. as the Claims Administrator to perform duties
20 in accordance with the Settlement Agreement.
The Court finds that the procedures for notifying the Class about the settlement as
22 described in the Settlement Agreement and Class Notice provide the best notice practicable under
23 the circumstances and therefore meet the requirements of due process, and directs the mailing of
24 the Class Notice and the attachments thereto in accordance with the Settlement Agreement.
The Court approves, as to form and content, the proposed Class Notice and
26 associated forms. The Claims Administrator is authorized to mail those documents, after they are
27 updated with the appropriate dates and deadlines consistent with the Settlement Agreement, to the
28 Class Action members as provided in the Settlement Agreement.
-2Simril v. TVI, Inc.
The Court approves the requirements for submitting objections to the Settlement
2 Agreement set forth in the Class Notice. Class Members who wish to object to the Settlement
3 must send or file a written objection with the Court, not later than sixty calendar days from the
4 date the Claims Administrator mails the Class Notice to the Class Members. Class Members who
5 does not submit an objection in the manner and by the deadline specified above will be deemed to
6 have waived all objections and will be foreclosed from making any objections to the Settlement,
7 whether by appeal or otherwise. In the event any objections are asserted, Plaintiff and Defendant
8 may address those objections in their briefing for Final Approval of the Settlement.
The Court approves the procedures for Class Members to request exclusion from
10 the Settlement Agreement as set forth in the Class Notice. In particular, Class Members may elect
11 to opt out of the Settlement by sending a written request for exclusion to the Claims Administrator
12 at the address that is set forth in the Class Notice. To be timely, all such Requests for Exclusion
13 must be postmarked no later than sixty calendar days after the date the Claims Administrator mails
14 the Class Notice to the Class Members. Class Members who fail to comply with the opt-out
15 procedure shall not be excluded and shall instead be bound by all provisions of the Settlement
16 Agreement and all orders issued pursuant thereto.
The parties are ordered to carry out the Settlement according to the terms of the
18 Settlement Agreement.
-3Simril v. TVI, Inc.
Plaintiff shall file the motion for fees and costs by June 23, 2017. Plaintiff shall
2 file the motion for final approval of the settlement by July 28, 2017. The Court will conduct a
3 Fairness and Good Faith Determination Hearing on August 21, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. for the purposes
4 of: (i) determining the fairness, adequacy, and reasonableness of the Settlement Agreement terms
5 and associated settlement pursuant to class action procedures and requirements; (ii) determining
6 the good faith of the Settlement Agreement and associated settlement; and (iii) entering Judgment.
7 The Fairness and Good Faith Determination Hearing may be continued without further notice to
8 Class Members.
IT IS SO ORDERED
Dated: April 17, 2017
United States District Judge
-4Simril v. TVI, Inc.
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?