Neal v. Polycom, Inc. et al

Filing 104

ORDER REQUIRING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RE: UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS SETTLEMENT; CONTINUING HEARING. Set/Reset Deadlines as to 102 MOTION Preliminary Approval of Settlement . Motion Hearing set for 2/16/2016 is CONTINUED to Tuesday, 2/23/2016 02:00 PM before Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 2/9/16. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/9/2016)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

MARK NATHANSON, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,

9

Plaintiff,
10
11

Northern District of California

ORDER REQUIRING ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION RE: UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS
SETTLEMENT; CONTINUING HEARING

v.

12
United States District Court

Case No.: 13-cv-03476 YGR

POLYCOM, INC., et al.,

13

Re: Dkt. No. 102

Defendants.

14

On January 8, 2016 plaintiff Mark Nathanson (“Lead Plaintiff”) filed an unopposed motion for

15

preliminary approval of class action settlement. (Dkt. No. 102.) The Court has conducted an initial

16

review of the motion and requires additional information prior to a hearing on the matter.

17

Specifically, the Court requires further explanation and justification concerning the following:

18

1. the rationale underlying the plan of allocation of the settlement funds;

19

2. whether class members must independently complete the schedule of transactions on the

20
21

proof of claim form or if the administrator will pre-fill the form; and
3. the reason litigation expenses are in the range of $200,000 when the parties have engaged

22
23
24
25

in no discovery to date.
The Court also requests that Lead Plaintiff revise the proposed class notice (Dkt. No. 102-3)
and proposed summary class notice (Dkt. No. 102-4) to provide more transparency and simplicity.1
With respect to the proposed class notice, the first six pages thereof are especially cumbersome and

26
1

27
28

The Court recommends that counsel for Lead Plaintiff review class notices previously
approved by the undersigned, including those approved in Bernardino v. Target Corp., Inc., Civil
Case No. 12-cv-04639 (Dkt. No. 51-1) and Maritime Asset Mgt., LLC v. Neurogesx, Inc., Civil Case
No. 12-cv-05034-YGR (Dkt. No. 94-1).

1

must be revised to be more user-friendly for all class members. With respect to the proposed

2

summary class notice, it must be revised to make clear that counsel will seek thirty (30) percent of the

3

settlement amount.

4

Lead Plaintiff shall file the additional information as required herein, and revised class notice

5

and summary class notice documents, no later than February 16, 2016 at noon. The hearing

6

currently set for February 16, 2016 is hereby CONTINUED to Tuesday February 23, 2016 at 2:00 p.m.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 9, 2016

9
10

____________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

11

Northern District of California

United States District Court

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

2