Garcia et al v. Macy's West Stores, Inc. et al

Filing 84

ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL AND AWARDING ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 12/28/2017. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/28/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

RAMON GARCIA, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

8
v.

9
10

MACY'S WEST STORES, INC., et al.,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

ORDER GRANTING FINAL
APPROVAL AND AWARDING
ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS

Defendants.

11
12

Case No. 16-cv-04440-WHO

Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for final approval of the class action settlement and request

13

for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs was heard on December 20, 2017. Having considered the

14

record in the case and the pleadings filed I FIND and ORDER as follows:

15

1.

The Class is comprised of: “All individuals who performed services as Drivers

16

and/or Helpers delivering Macy’s/Bloomingdale’s products and/or furnishings, and associated

17

with Joseph Eletto Transfer, Inc. out of/at the location identified as the Macy’s Logistics and

18

Operations distribution center, 1208 Whipple Road, Union City, California 94587 from July 1,

19

2012 to December 27, 2014.”

20

2.

With respect to the Class and for purposes of approving this settlement only, I find

21

that: (a) the members of the Class are ascertainable and so numerous that joinder of all members is

22

impracticable; (b) there are questions of law or fact common to the Class, and there is a well-

23

defined community of interest among members of the Class with respect to the subject matter of

24

the lawsuit; (c) the claims of the Class Representatives are typical of the claims of the other

25

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

26

interests of the Class; (e) a class action is superior to other available methods for an efficient

27

adjudication of this controversy; and (f) the counsel of record for the Class Representatives

28

(“Class Counsel”) are qualified to serve as class counsel

1

3.

Ramon Garcia, Victor Ramirez, Adrian Valente, Mario Pinon, and Mynor Cabrera

2

are confirmed as Class Representatives and awarded $2,00.00 each for their services as Class

3

Representatives;

4

4.

5
6
7
8
9

The Law Office of Thomas W. Falvey, and JML Law, APLC are confirmed as

Class Counsel;
5.

Payment of fees and other charges of the settlement administrator KCC Class

Action Services, LLC, totaling up to $15,000.00 are approved;
6.

Based on the motion for attorneys’ fees and declarations submitted in support, and

for the reasons explained at the final approval hearing, I find that an award of attorneys’ fees in the
amount of 25% of the Settlement Fund of $1,550,000.00 is justified and an award of litigation

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

costs of $11,620.09 is justified based on the declarations submitted. While a good result was

12

achieved for the class, counsel did not comply with this District’s Procedural Guidance for Class

13

Action Settlements and provided only the total hours they spent, rather than the required detailed

14

lodestar information that would have allowed me to evaluate their desire for a 33% recovery. This

15

failure, and the lack of litigation (as opposed to settlement) effort needed, make an award of 25%

16

of the Settlement Fund (almost double the amount they claimed as the lodestar) appropriate.

17

7.

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e), I GRANT final approval to the Settlement, and

18

ORDER the parties to implement, and comply with, its terms. I find that the Settlement is fair,

19

reasonable, and adequate, and is binding on all members of the Class. I conclude that the

20

Settlement affords substantial monetary relief to the Class, and is rationally related to the strength

21

of Plaintiffs’ claims given the risk, expense, complexity, and duration of further litigation. I also

22

find that the Settlement is the result of arms-length negotiations between counsel after thorough

23

factual and legal investigation, and significant litigation including fully briefing a motion for class

24

certification. I further find that the response of the Class to the Settlement supports final approval,

25

as no Class Members objected to the proposed Settlement and none have excluded themselves

26

from the Settlement.

27
28

8.

The Notice provided to the Class constituted the best notice practicable under the

circumstances, and met the requirements of due process under the United States Constitution and
2

1

California law, by providing individual notice to all Class Members who could be identified

2

through reasonable effort.

3

9.

I find that the proposed plan of allocation is fair and reasonable. The procedures set

4

forth in the Settlement by which payments are to be calculated and made to Class Members are

5

fair, reasonable, and adequate. Payment shall be made according to those allocations and pursuant

6

to the procedure set forth in the Settlement and this Order.

7

10.

By operation of this Order and upon the effective date of the Judgment, Plaintiffs

8

shall release, relinquish, and discharge all claims against the Releasees released under the terms of

9

Paragraphs 29 through 31 of the Settlement.

10

11.

By operation of this Order and upon the effective date of the Judgment, all Class

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Members who have not opted out of the Settlement shall be deemed to have, and by operation of

12

the Judgment shall have, fully, finally, and forever released, relinquished, and discharged all

13

Released Claims against the Releasees as set forth in Paragraph 29 of the Settlement.

14

12.

This Judgment is intended to be only a partial disposition of the above captioned

15

action, and is intended to be immediately appealable only as to the claims against Defendant

16

Joseph Eletto Transfer, Inc., and the portion of the claims within the statutory period of July 1,

17

2012 to December 27, 2014 for Defendant Macy’s West Stores, Inc.

18

13.

I shall retain jurisdiction with respect to all matters related to the administration and

19

consummation of the settlement, and any and all claims, asserted in, arising out of, or related to

20

the subject matter of the lawsuit, including but not limited to all matters related to the settlement

21

and the determination of all controversies relating thereto.

22

15.

The award of attorneys’ fees and costs (as identified above) are to be deducted from

23

the settlement fund of pursuant to the terms of the Amended Joint Stipulation of Class Action

24

Settlement and Release, attached to the Declaration of Thomas W. Falvey as Exhibit “1”.

25
26

16.

The Settlement Administrator shall pay the above-stated attorneys’ fees and costs

to Class Counsel within twenty-one (21) calendar days of the Effective Date, as defined in

27
28
3

1
2
3

paragraph 9(b) of the settlement.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 28, 2017

4
5
William H. Orrick
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4