Hatamian et al v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. et al

Filing 363

ORDER APPROVING PLAN OF ALLOCATION. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 3/2/18. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/2/2018)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN &
BERNSTEIN, LLP
Katherine L. Benson (State Bar No. 259826)
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Liaison Counsel
LABATON SUCHAROW LLP
Jonathan Gardner (pro hac vice)
Carol C. Villegas (pro hac vice)
Alec T. Coquin (pro hac vice)
140 Broadway
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

11
12

Co-Lead Counsel for the Class

MOTLEY RICE LLC
James M. Hughes (pro hac vice)
William S. Norton (pro hac vice)
Max N. Gruetzmacher (pro hac vice)
Michael J. Pendell (pro hac vice)
28 Bridgeside Blvd.
Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Co-Lead Counsel for the Class

13
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION

15
16
17
18

BABAK HATAMIAN and LUSSA DENNJ
SALVATORE, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated,

19
20
21
22
23

Plaintiffs,
v.
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC.,
RORY P. READ, THOMAS J. SEIFERT,
RICHARD A. BERGMAN, AND LISA T.
SU,

24
Defendants.
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING PLAN OF ALLOCATION
CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR

Case No. 4:14-cv-00226-YGR
CLASS ACTION
[PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING
PLAN OF ALLOCATION

1

THIS MATTER having come before the Court on the motion of Class Representatives

2

Arkansas Teacher Retirement System and KBC Asset Management NV, on behalf of themselves

3

and the Class, for final approval of the proposed class action Settlement and approval of the

4

proposed Plan of Allocation; the Court having considered all papers filed and proceedings had

5
6

herein and otherwise being fully informed;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that:

7
8
9
10
11

1.

This Order incorporates by reference the definitions in the Stipulation and

Agreement of Settlement, dated as of October 9, 2017 (the “Stipulation”), and all capitalized
terms used, but not defined herein, shall have the same meanings as set forth in the Stipulation.
2.

Pursuant to and in compliance with Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil

12

Procedure, this Court hereby finds and concludes that due and adequate notice was directed to

13

Persons who are Class Members who could be identified with reasonable effort, advising them of

14

the Plan of Allocation and of their right to object thereto, and a full and fair opportunity was

15

accorded to Persons who are Class Members to be heard with respect to the Plan of Allocation.

16

There were no objections to the proposed Plan of Allocation.

17

3.

The Court hereby finds and concludes that the Plan of Allocation for the

18

calculation of the claims of Authorized Claimants that is set forth in the Notice of Proposed

19

Class Action Settlement and Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses (the “Settlement Notice”)

20

disseminated to Class Members, provides a fair and reasonable basis upon which to allocate the

21

Net Settlement Fund among eligible Class Members.

22

4.

The Court hereby finds and concludes that the Plan of Allocation, as set forth in

23

the Settlement Notice, is, in all respects, fair and reasonable and the Court hereby approves the

24

Plan of Allocation.

25

March 2
Dated: _________________, 2018

26

____________________________________
HONORABLE YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

27
28

[PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING PLAN OF ALLOCATION
CASE NO. 4:14-CV-00226-YGR