Diaz et al v. Intuit, Inc.
Filing
196
ORDER Granting (183) Motion for Final Approval of Class Settlement; GRANTING (184) Motion for Attorney Fees in case 5:15-cv-01778-EJD. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 5/15/2019. (ejdlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/15/2019)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 IN RE INTUIT DATA LITIGATION
Master Docket No. 15-CV-1778-EJD-SVK
12
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
15
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING FINAL
APPROVAL OF CLASS SETTLEMENT,
AWARDING RESONABLE ATTORNEYS’
FEES, COSTS AND SERVICE AWARDS;
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
16
Honorable Edward J. Davila
13
14
17
ALL ACTIONS
This matter came before the Court for hearing on May 9, 2019, pursuant to the Court’s
18 Preliminary Approval Order dated October 4, 2018 (Dkt. No. 173; as modified by Dkt. 179,
19 189), and on the motion for final approval of the Class Action Settlement Agreement, dated
20 August 23, 2018 (the “Agreement”), entered into by the Parties, as well as Class Counsel’s
motion for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs and for Plaintiff service awards. Due and
21
adequate notice having been given to the Class Members of the proposed Settlement and the
22
pending motions, as directed by the Court’s Preliminary Approval Order, and upon consideration
23 of all papers filed and proceedings had herein, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY
24 ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:
25
26
1.
Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the same meaning as set
forth in the Agreement.
27
28
1
1
2.
The Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, and has
2 personal jurisdiction over the Parties. Venue is proper in this District.
3
3.
4
All persons in the United States in whose identities fraudulent
federal tax returns for the Tax Years 2014, 2015, and/or 2016 were
filed using TurboTax, as determined by the United States Internal
Revenue Service. Excluded from the Class are all employees of
Intuit, counsel for the Parties, the Judge presiding over this Action,
and Court staff.
5
6
7
8
The “Class” for purposes of this Order, shall mean:
4.
The Court finds that the notice provisions set forth under the Class Action
9 Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1715, were complied with in this matter.
10
5.
The Court finds that the program for disseminating notice to the Class Members
11 provided for in the Agreement, and previously approved and directed by the Court (hereinafter,
12 the “Notice Program”), has been implemented by the Settlement Administrator and the Parties,
13 and that such Notice Program, including the approved forms of notice, is reasonable and
14 appropriate and satisfies all applicable due process and other requirements, and constitutes notice
15 reasonably calculated under the circumstances to appraise Class Members of the pendency of the
16 Action, the terms of the Settlement, their right to object to the Settlement, and their right to
17 appear at the Final Approval Hearing.
18
6.
The Court reaffirms that this Action is properly maintained as a class action, for
19 settlement purposes only, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a), 23(b)(2) and 23(e),
20 and that Class Counsel and the Plaintiffs, as class representatives, fairly and adequately represent
21 the interests of the Class Members. Specifically, for settlement purposes only, the Court finds
22 that the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) are satisfied: The Class is so
23 numerous that joinder of all members is impractical. There are more than 1 million persons in
24 the Class. Moreover, there are issues that are common to the Class, including whether Intuit
25 took adequate steps to prevent taxpayers’ identities from being used by third parties to file
26 fraudulent federal tax returns using the TurboTax service. Further, the Plaintiffs’ claims arise
27 from the same alleged course of conduct and are typical of the Class. Finally, the Court finds
28 that the Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have adequately represented the class and that there are not
2
1 conflicts among the class. The Court further finds, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
2 23(b)(2), that as alleged, Intuit has acted on grounds that apply generally to the Class, so that
3 final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the Class as a
4 whole.
5
7.
The Court finds that the Agreement, including the exhibits thereto, is fair,
6 reasonable and adequate to the Class Members, has been entered into in good faith, and should
7 be and hereby is fully and finally approved pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. The
8 Agreement represents a fair resolution of the claims asserted on behalf of the Plaintiffs and the
9 Class Members in this Action and released by the Agreement, and fully and finally resolves all
10 such claims. Intuit, Plaintiffs, and the Class Members shall be bound by the Agreement,
11 including the Release provisions set forth in paragraphs 72-79 of the Agreement, which is
12 incorporated by reference herein, and by this Order and the Final Judgment entered in connection
13 with this Order.
14
8.
In granting final approval of the Agreement, the Court has considered the factors
15 that courts in this Circuit consider in evaluating proposed class settlements. See Churchill
16 Village LLC v. General Electric Corp., 361 F.3d 566, 575 (9th Cir. 2004). The Court finds that,
17 given the benefits provided to Class Members pursuant to the Agreement; the strengths and
18 weaknesses of the parties’ respective claims and defenses in the litigation; the risk, expense,
19 complexity, and likely duration of further litigation; the fact that significant discovery and
20 litigation have occurred in this case; given the experience and views of Class Counsel who have
21 considerable experience litigating class actions and other complex cases; and given the positive
22 reaction of the Class Members—only eight objections were filed—the Agreement is fair,
23 reasonable, and adequate and should be approved.
24
9.
The Court finds that the Agreement was negotiated in good faith and at arms-
25 length by the parties and their experienced counsel, with the assistance of a highly-capable
26 mediator, Hon. Edward A. Infante (Ret.) of JAMS, and is free of any evidence of collusion. See
27 In re Bluetooth Headset Prod. Liab. Litig., 654 F.3d 935, 946 (9th Cir. 2011).
28
3
1
10.
The Court further finds, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(2), that
2 the Plaintiffs and Class Counsel have adequately represented the Class; the Agreement here was
3 negotiated at arms-length; the settlement benefits provided under the Agreement are adequate in
4 relation to the scope of the claims released; and that the Agreement treats the Class Members
5 equitably relative to each other.
6
11.
The Court also grants Class Counsel’s request for attorneys’ fees, costs, and
7 Plaintiff service awards.
8
12.
Class Counsel are hereby awarded attorneys’ fees and costs in the total amount of
9 $2,820,000.00 (with such total amount comprised of attorneys’ fees of $2,717,225.56, and
10 reimbursement of litigation costs of $102,774.44). Intuit shall pay such amount to Class Counsel
11 pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, separate from and in addition to the other benefits
12 provided to Class Members pursuant to the Settlement. The requested fees represent a negative
13 multiplier of approximately 0.715 on counsel’s submitted lodestar. The Court finds that the
14 requested fees are reasonable and appropriate under the circumstances and under applicable
15 standards, given inter alia the novelty and complexity of the issues in this case, the results
16 achieved, Class Counsel’s commitment of time and resources in this case; and the risks that
17 Class Counsel assumed in litigating this case on a contingency basis. The Court further finds
18 that Class Counsel’s request for reimbursement of litigation costs is reasonable in amount, and
19 that such costs were reasonably incurred in the prosecution of this case.
20
13.
The Court hereby awards service awards of $5,000 each, to Plaintiffs Richard
21 Brown, Christine Diaz, Carol Knoch, James Lebinski, David Stock, and Marilyn Williams, to
22 compensate them for their commitments and efforts on behalf of the Class Members. Intuit shall
23 pay such amounts pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, separate from and in addition to the
24 other benefits provided to Class Members pursuant to the Settlement. The Court finds that the
25 requested service awards are reasonable, appropriate, and justified by the circumstances of the
26 Plaintiffs’ efforts and commitments on behalf of the Class.
27
28
4
1
14.
Eight (8) objections to the Agreement and/or Class Counsel’s fee request were
2 submitted. As stated at the hearing, the Court has considered the objections and hereby overrules
3 each of them.
4
15.
The Parties and Settlement Administrator are hereby directed to implement the
5 Settlement in accordance with the terms and provisions thereof.
6
16.
As of the Effective Date, Plaintiffs and all other Class Members, on behalf of
7 themselves and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, representatives, agents, partners,
8 successors, and assigns (collectively, the “Releasing Parties”), shall waive, release, forever
9 discharge, and will not in any manner pursue the Released Claims against any Released Parties,
10 as defined and set forth in paragraph 72 of the Agreement. As set forth in the Agreement, the
11 Release shall apply only to claims for declaratory, injunctive and non-monetary equitable relief,
12 and not to any claims for damages or other monetary relief. Intuit shall not sue Plaintiffs or their
13 counsel for malicious prosecution or abuse of process based on the filing of this Action or the
14 underlying actions, or any papers previously filed therein.
15
17.
The Court hereby dismisses this Action with prejudice, and without fees or costs
16 except as provided in the Agreement and this Order.
17
18.
Nothing in this Order or the Final Judgment entered in connection with this Order
18 shall preclude any action to enforce the terms of the Settlement.
19
19.
Without affecting the finality of this Order or the Final Judgment entered in
20 connection with this Order in any way, the Court hereby retains continuing jurisdiction over:
21 (a) all matters relating to the modification, interpretation, administration, implementation,
22 effectuation and enforcement of the Settlement; and (b) the Parties, Class Counsel and Class
23 Members for the purpose of administering, supervising, construing and enforcing this Order and
24 the Settlement in accordance with its terms.
25
20.
Neither this Order (nor the Final Judgment entered in connection with this Order),
26 the Agreement, nor any action taken to carry out this Order or the Final Judgment entered in
27 connection with this Order shall be construed or used against Intuit or the Released Parties as an
28
5
1 admission, concession or evidence of the validity of any claim or defense or any actual or
2 potential fault, wrongdoing, or liability whatsoever.
3
21.
Without further order of the Court, the Parties may agree to reasonably necessary
4 extensions of time to carry out any of the provisions of the Settlement and to make other non5 material modifications, in implementing the Settlement, that are not inconsistent with this Order.
6
22.
There is no just reason for delay in the entry of this Final Judgment and
7 immediate entry by the Clerk of the Court is expressly directed pursuant to Rule 54 (b) of the
8 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
10 Dated: _______________, 2019
May 15
11
12
Edward J. Davila
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
13
14
15
1724396.3
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
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?