Ashker et al v. Schwarzenegger et al

Filing 488

ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT re 486 Brief. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 1/26/16. (jebS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/26/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 OAKLAND DIVISION 11 TODD ASHKER, et al., C 09-05796 CW Plaintiffs, [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 12 13 v. 14 15 GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 This civil-rights class-action case concerns the California Department of Corrections and 19 Rehabilitation’s (CDCR) policies and practices related to gang validation and management and its 20 use of segregated housing, including the Security Housing Unit (SHU) at Pelican Bay State 21 Prison. Plaintiffs claim that CDCR’s gang validation policies did not provide sufficient due 22 process and that confinement in Pelican Bay’s SHU for ten or more years violates the United 23 States Constitution. 24 The parties have entered into a settlement agreement (Settlement Agreement or Agreement) 25 (J. Lobel Decl. Ex. A) that would settle all claims for relief asserted in this case. The Court 26 granted preliminary approval of the Agreement on October 14, 2015. (ECF No. 445.) 27 Subsequently, Court-approved notice was timely disseminated to the classes. (ECF No. 456.) 28 The Court has thoroughly considered all comments and objections filed during the notice period. [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 1 CASE NO. C 09-05796 CW 1 On January 12, 2016, the parties filed a Joint Motion for Final Approval of Class Action 2 Settlement Agreement. The parties’ Joint Motion seeks an order providing that the Court: (1) 3 grant final approval of the Settlement Agreement; (2) retain jurisdiction to enforce the 4 Agreement; and (3) stay all proceedings pending completion of the Agreement’s terms. On 5 January 26, 2016, the Court held a Final Fairness Hearing at which counsel for Plaintiffs and 6 Defendants presented argument, and during which the Court considered whether the parties’ 7 Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. 8 9 The Court has presided over the proceedings in the above-captioned action and has reviewed all the pleadings, records, and papers on file. The Court has reviewed the Joint Motion 10 for Final Approval, along with the Settlement Agreement and supporting documents, and has 11 considered the parties’ arguments concerning the settlement of this class action. 12 Therefore, with good cause appearing, the Court hereby orders as follows: 13 1. For the reasons stated in the Joint Motion for Final Approval, the Court finds, under 14 Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that: (a) all notice requirements have been 15 fulfilled, and that notice was successfully directed in a reasonable manner to class members; and 16 (b) the Settlement Agreement is fair, adequate, and reasonable. On that basis, final approval of 17 the Settlement Agreement is hereby GRANTED, and the Agreement is incorporated by reference. 18 19 20 21 2. The Court finds that, for purposes of settlement only, the Settlement Agreement meets the requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(1). 3. The stay of all proceedings in this case is continued pending the completion of the terms of the Settlement Agreement. 22 4. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. The Court retains jurisdiction of this matter to enforce the Agreement’s terms. 24 25 Dated: January 26 2016 __________, 26 _______________________________________ The Honorable Claudia Wilken United States District Court Judge 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 2 CASE NO. C 09-05796 CW

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?