City of Ann Arbor Employees' Retirement System v. Accuray Incorporated et al
Filing
146
ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken granting 134 Motion for Attorney Fees and Expenses. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/8/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
OAKLAND DIVISION
12 In re ACCURAY INC. SECURITIES
LITIGATION
13
14 This Document Relates To:
15
ALL ACTIONS.
16
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Master File No. 4:09-cv-03362-CW
CLASS ACTION
[PROPOSED] ORDER AWARDING LEAD
COUNSEL ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND
EXPENSES
DATE:
TIME:
CTRM:
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
635724_1
September 1, 2011
2:00 p.m.
The Honorable Claudia Wilken
1
This matter having come before the Court on September 1, 2011, on the application of
2 counsel for the Lead Plaintiffs for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses incurred in the captioned
3 action, the Court, having considered all papers filed and proceedings conducted herein, having found
4 the settlement of this action to be fair, reasonable, and adequate and otherwise being fully informed
5 in the premises and good cause appearing therefore;
6
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that:
7
1.
All of the capitalized terms used herein shall have the same meanings as set forth in
8 the Stipulation of Settlement, dated as of April 27, 2011 (the “Stipulation”), and filed with the Court.
9
10
2.
This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this application and all matters
relating thereto, including all Members of the Settlement Class who have not timely and validly
11
12
requested exclusion.
3.
13
The Court hereby awards Lead Counsel attorneys’ fees of 25% of the Settlement
14 Fund, plus reimbursement of litigation expenses in the amount of $284,279.23 together with the
15 interest earned thereon for the same time period and at the same rate as that earned on the Settlement
16 Fund until paid. The Court finds that the amount of fees awarded is appropriate and is fair and
17
reasonable under the “percentage-of-recovery” method given the substantial risks of non-recovery,
18
the time and effort involved, and the result obtained for the Settlement Class. See Vizcaino v.
19
20
Microsoft Corp., 290 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2002).
4.
21
The fees shall be allocated among counsel for the plaintiffs by Lead Counsel in a
22 manner that reflects each such counsel’s contribution to the institution, prosecution, and resolution of
23 the captioned action.
24
25
5.
The awarded attorneys’ fees and expenses and interest earned thereon shall
immediately be paid to Lead Counsel subject to the terms, conditions, and obligations of the
26
Stipulation, and in particular ¶7.2 thereof, which terms, conditions, and obligations are incorporated
27
28
635724_1
herein.
[PROPOSED] ORDER AWARDING LEAD COUNSEL ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND
EXPENSES - 4:09-cv-03362-CW
-1-
1
6.
Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §78u-4(a)(4), Lead Plaintiff Zhengxu He is hereby awarded
2 $346.72. Such reimbursement is appropriate considering Lead Plaintiff’s participation in the
3
4
ongoing prosecution of the litigation and the evidentiary support presented.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
12/8/2011
DATED: ____________________
7
THE HONORABLE CLAUDIA WILKEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Submitted by:
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN
& DOWD LLP
SHAWN A. WILLIAMS
DANIEL J. PFEFFERBAUM
Post Montgomery Center
One Montgomery Street, Suite 1800
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: 415/288-4545
415/288-4534 (fax)
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN
& DOWD LLP
JOY ANN BULL
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
s/ Joy Ann Bull
JOY ANN BULL
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: 619/231-1058
619/231-7423 (fax)
LABATON SUCHAROW LLP
CHRISTOPHER J. KELLER
JONATHAN GARDNER
MARK GOLDMAN
CAROL C. VILLEGAS
140 Broadway
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: 212/907-0700
212/818-0477 (fax)
Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs
28
635724_1
[PROPOSED] ORDER AWARDING LEAD COUNSEL ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND
EXPENSES - 4:09-cv-03362-CW
-2-
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?