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)
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?