Datta v. Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC et al

Filing 133

Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh Granting 128 Motion for Settlement. (Attachments: # 1 Amended Long-Form Notice (Red-Line), # 2 Amended Postcard Notice (Red-Line), # 3 Amended Long-Form Notice (Clean), # 4 Amended Postcard Notice (Clean))(lhklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/13/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

MEENA ARTHUR DATTA,
Plaintiff,

13
v.

14
15

ASSET RECOVERY SOLUTIONS, LLC,

16

Case No. 15-CV-00188-LHK
ORDER GRANTING RENEWED JOINT
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
APPROVAL
Re: Dkt. No. 110

Defendant.

17
Plaintiff Meena Arthur Datta (“Plaintiff”) brings this action against Defendant Asset

18
19

Recovery Solutions, LLC (“Defendant”).1 Before the Court is the parties’ Renewed Joint Motion

20

for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement. ECF No. 128 (“Mot.”); ECF No. 128-2

21

(“Settlement Agreement”). Along with the renewed joint motion for preliminary approval, the

22

parties filed a proposed Notice to be distributed to Class Members. ECF No. 128-3. The Court

23

held a Preliminary Approval Hearing on January 12, 2017. During the Preliminary Approval

24

Hearing, the Court proposed a number of suggested changes to the proposed Notice, to which the

25
26
27
28

1

Plaintiff filed her initial complaint against Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC and Oliphant
Financial, LLC. Oliphant Financial, LLC was dismissed from this action pursuant to a stipulation
of dismissal on March 9, 2015. ECF No. 22.
1
Case No. 15-CV-00188-LHK
ORDER GRANTING RENEWED JOINT MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL

1

parties agreed. Accordingly, these changes have been incorporated into the amended long-form

2

notice and amended postcard notice accompanying this Order (collectively, “Amended Notice”).

3

ECF No. 133-1 (red-lined copy of Amended Long-Form Notice); ECF No. 133-2 (red-lined copy

4

of Amended Postcard Notice); ECF No. 133-3 (clean copy of Amended Long-Form Notice); ECF

5

No. 133-4 (clean copy of Amended Postcard Notice).

6
7

Having considered the renewed joint motion for preliminary approval, the record in this
case, and the statements made at the Preliminary Approval Hearing,

8

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

9

1. On March 18, 2016, this Court certified the following Settlement Class pursuant to Fed.
R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3): (i) all persons with addresses in California, (ii) to whom Defendant sent, or

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

caused to be sent, a collection letter in the form of Exhibit “1” in an envelope in the form of

12

Exhibit “2,” (iii) in an attempt to collect an alleged debt originally owed to HSBC Bank Nevada,

13

N.A., (iv) which was incurred primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, (v) which

14

were not returned as undeliverable by the U.S. Post Office, (vi) during the period one year prior to

15

the date of filing this action through the date of class certification. ECF No. 66.

16

2. The Court previously found: (A) the class as defined is sufficiently numerous such that

17

joinder is impracticable; (B) common questions of law and fact predominate over any questions

18

affecting only individual Class Members, and include whether or not Defendant violated the Fair

19

Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (“FDCPA”) and the Rosenthal Fair Debt

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Collection Practices Act, (“RFDCPA”), Cal. Civil Code § 1788.17 as alleged in the Complaint;
(C) the claims of Plaintiff are typical of the Class Members’ claims; (D) Plaintiff is an appropriate
and adequate representative of the Class and her attorneys were appointed as Class Counsel; and
(E) a class action is the superior method for the fair and efficient adjudication of the claims of the
Class Members.
3. The Court finds that the proposed settlement is within the range of fairness and
reasonableness and grants preliminary approval. In the event that the proposed settlement is not
finally approved for any reason, Defendant shall, pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, retain its
2
Case No. 15-CV-00188-LHK
ORDER GRANTING RENEWED JOINT MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL

1

right to contest the claims of the Class.
4. The Court proposed revisions to the Notice at the Preliminary Approval Hearing, to

2
3

which the parties agreed. The Court approves the Amended Notice, and directs that the Amended

4

Notice be disseminated in accordance with the Settlement Agreement. See ECF No. 133-1 (red-

5

lined copy of Amended Long-Form Notice); ECF No. 133-2 (red-lined copy of Amended Postcard

6

Notice); ECF No. 133-3 (clean copy of Amended Long-Form Notice); ECF No. 133-4 (clean copy

7

of Amended Postcard Notice).

8

5. The Court finds that Amended Notice is the only notice to the Class Members that is

9

required and further finds that such notice satisfies the requirements of due process and Fed. R.

10

Civ. P. 23.
6. Class Members shall have seventy-five (75) days from the date of this Order to opt out

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

or object to the proposed Settlement Agreement.
7. Any Class Member who excludes himself or herself from the Class shall not be bound

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

by the Settlement Agreement and shall not be entitled to any of its benefits. To be timely, a
request for exclusion must be sent to the Class Administrator, IYLM Group, Inc. (address for
which will be provided by notice to the class) within seventy-five (75) days from the date of this
Order.
8. The request for exclusion must contain the excluded Class Member’s name, address,
telephone number, and signature.
9. Any Class Member who objects to the settlement shall have a right to appear and be
heard at the Final Approval Hearing provided that such Class Member mails to the Class
Administrator a written objection postmarked no later than seventy-five (75) days from the date of

22

this Order. Class Counsel and Defendant’s counsel shall respond to the objections, if any, by

23
means of a memorandum of law no later than seven (7) days prior to the Final Approval Hearing.
24
10. A Final Approval Hearing on the fairness and reasonableness of the Settlement
25
26

Agreement will be held before this Court on April 27, 2017 at 1:30 p.m.
11. The schedule by which the events referenced above shall occur as follows:

27
28

3
Case No. 15-CV-00188-LHK
ORDER GRANTING RENEWED JOINT MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL

1
2

Event

Date

4

Notice Disseminated to Class Members

February 9, 2017

Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs and Service
Awards; Motion for Final Approval

March 11, 2017

Deadline to Object or Opt Out

3

March 28, 2017

Replies in Support of Motion for Attorney’s Fees
and Costs and Service Awards; Claims
Administrator Affidavit of Compliance with Notice
Requirements

April 20, 2017

Final Approval Hearing

April 27, 2017, at 1:30 p.m.

5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

12. All parties are ordered to comply with the terms of the Amended Settlement
Agreement.
13. Jurisdiction by this Court is retained over this litigation and the parties to this litigation,
and each of the Class Members for all matters relating to this litigation, the Amended Settlement
Agreement, including (without limitation) all matters relating to the administration, interpretation,
effectuation, and/or enforcement of the Amended Settlement Agreement and this Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 13, 2017
______________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
Case No. 15-CV-00188-LHK
ORDER GRANTING RENEWED JOINT MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL