Woburn Retirement System v. Omnivision Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 190

ORDER RE: 189 DISTRIBUTION OF SETTLEMENT FUND TO THE CLASS. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 4/12/2018. (ejdlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/12/2018)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 12 In re OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES, INC. LITIGATION 13 14 15 16 17 This Document Relates to: ALL ACTIONS. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 5:11-cv-05235-RMW [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: DISTRIBUTION OF SETTLEMENT FUND TO THE CLASS 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [Proposed] Order Re: Distribution of Settlement Fund to the Class Case No.: 5:11-Cv-05235-RMW 1 WHEREAS: 2 A. This action was a class action asserting claims under the federal 3 securities laws on behalf of a Settlement Class, as certified by order of the Court dated June 5, 4 2015, for purposes of effectuating the settlement, defined as follows: 5 All persons and entities that, during the period from August 27, 2010 to and 6 through November 6, 2011, inclusive (the “Class Period”), purchased or 7 otherwise acquired shares of OmniVision’s publicly traded common stock in 8 the open market, and were damaged thereby. Excluded from the Class were 9 Defendants, members of the immediate families of the Individual Defendants, 10 any entity in which any Defendant has or had a controlling interest, current or 11 former directors and officers of OmniVision, and the legal representatives, 12 heirs, successors, or assigns of any such excluded person or entity. Also 13 excluded from the Settlement Class were those persons and entities who 14 submitted valid and timely requests for exclusion from the Settlement Class in 15 accordance with the requirements set forth in the Notice. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 B. Lead Plaintiffs Oakland County Employees' Retirement System, Laborers' District Council and Contractors' Pension Fund of Ohio, and Woburn Retirement System, on behalf of the Settlement Class, entered into a settlement with Defendants memorialized in the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement dated December 30, 2015. The parties agreed to a full and complete settlement of all class claims in exchange for the payment of $12,500,000.00 in cash (the “Settlement”). C. On June 5, 2015, this Court held a hearing to consider whether the Settlement should be approved as fair, reasonable and adequate; D. On June 5, 2015, the Court entered an order and final judgment approving the Settlement and dismissing this action with prejudice as against all Defendants; E. The Settlement provided for members of the class to submit proof of 28 [Proposed] Order Re: Distribution of Settlement Fund to the Class Case No.: 5:11-Cv-05235-RMW 1 claim forms in order to participate in the distribution of the Net Settlement Fund; 2 F. Members of the class did submit proof of claim forms and these proof of claim 3 forms have been reviewed and analyzed by Heffler Claims Administration (“Heffler” or “Claims 4 Administrator”), the claims administrator retained by Plaintiffs’ Lead Counsel to administer the 5 Settlement; 6 G. Lead Plaintiffs have filed with the Court the Affidavit of Edward J. 7 Sincavage, CPA ("Sincavage Affidavit"), which describes in detail, among other things, the 8 dissemination of the Settlement Notice and Proof of Claim forms, the procedures following in 9 processing claims received, and the results of the claims process; 10 H. All Settlement Class Members who filed claims that were in any way 11 deficient were informed that their claims were deficient and were given the opportunity to 12 correct any deficiency prior to their claims being finally rejected or to contest the decision as to 13 the deficiency, and such procedures satisfied the requirements of due process; 14 15 16 I. rejected in whole or in part so that they could contest the decision, and such procedures satisfied the requirements of due process; and 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Due notice was given to all members of the class whose claims were finally J. To date, none of these claimants have contested the rejection of his, her or its claim. NOW, THEREFORE, upon consideration of: (1) the motion for approval of distribution of the Net Settlement Fund to the Settlement Class and memorandum in support thereof; and (2) the Sincavage Affidavit, and for good cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED as follows: 1. The decisions and activities of Plaintiffs’ Lead Counsel and Heffler in connection with the administration of the Settlement are APPROVED, and all decisions described in the Sincavage Affidavit relating to claims being payable or non-payable are APPROVED. Specifically, the claims listed in Exhibit D to the Sincavage Affidavit, entitled “Payable Claims,” are approved as payable. The Court specifically APPROVES the rejection of the claims as 28 [Proposed] Order Re: Distribution of Settlement Fund to the Class Case No.: 5:11-Cv-05235-RMW 1 listed in Exhibit E to the Sincavage Affidavit of those persons whose claims were deemed 2 deficient or were rejected by Heffler. 3 2. Plaintiffs’ Lead Counsel and Heffler are DIRECTED to distribute the Net 4 Settlement Fund (after making the payments specified in Paragraphs 3 and 4 below and after 5 making any other disbursements authorized by the Court) to all Authorized Claimants, as 6 described in the Sincavage Affidavit and the Exhibits thereto. Distribution shall be made in 7 accordance with the Plan of Allocation previously approved by the Court. 8 9 10 11 3. The Court hereby DIRECTS that payment, if necessary, be made from the Settlement Fund to the Internal Revenue Service for the proper amount of taxes due and owing on the interest earned on the Settlement Fund while in escrow. 4. The Court hereby DIRECTS payment in the amount of $261,972.27 to be made 12 to Heffler for its final invoice for services rendered and expenses incurred in connection with the 13 administration of the Settlement. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 5. The Court hereby DIRECTS that no claim submitted after March 23, 2018 may be accepted for any reason whatsoever. Accordingly, Settlement Class Members are barred from making any further claim against the Net Settlement Fund after that date. Further, all persons involved in the review, verification, calculation, tabulation, or any other aspect of the processing of the claims or otherwise involved in the administration of the Settlement Fund or the Net Settlement Fund are released and discharged from any and all claims arising out of such involvement. 6. The Court also finds that one year after the final distribution of the Net Settlement Fund to Authorized Claimants, it is appropriate for Heffler to destroy all claim forms and related correspondence. Heffler shall, however, retain all other administrative records, including copies of the Payable Claims and Non-Payable Claims listings, and the computer database used to create the listings, for a period of three years after the final distribution of the Net Settlement Fund to Authorized Claimants. 27 28 [Proposed] Order Re: Distribution of Settlement Fund to the Class Case No.: 5:11-Cv-05235-RMW 1 7. Eighteen months after initial distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, and after 2 reasonable and diligent efforts to distribute the entire Net Settlement Fund, any remaining 3 balance in the Net Settlement Fund is to be distributed to the ABA Fund for Justice and 4 Education, a non-sectarian, not-for-profit § 501(c)(3) organization, that supports law-related 5 public service. 6 8. This Court retains jurisdiction to consider any further applications concerning the 7 administration of the Settlement, and such other and further relief as this Court deems 8 appropriate. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 11 12 Dated: April 12 , 2018 Honorable Edward J. Davila United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [Proposed] Order Re: Distribution of Settlement Fund to the Class Case No.: 5:11-Cv-05235-RMW

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?