Grace v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 457

Order by Judge Lucy H. Koh granting #435 Final Approval of Class Action Settlement. (lhklc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/31/2021)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

12
13
14

CHRISTINA GRACE and KEN POTTER,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated,

APPLE INC.,
Defendants.

18

20
21

Re: Dkt. No. 435

v.

16

19

ORDER GRANTING FINAL
APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION
SETTLEMENT

Plaintiffs,

15

17

Case No. 5:17-CV-00551-LHK

Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion for final approval of the parties’ class action
settlement (“Settlement”). ECF No. 435. On September 10, 2020, the Court preliminarily
approved the Settlement, ECF No. 426 (“Preliminary Approval Order”). On February 8, 2021, the

22
Court held a hearing to consider final approval of the Settlement. Having considered all the
23
briefing, the arguments of counsel, the relevant law, and the record in this case, the Court hereby
24

GRANTS the parties’ motion for final approval of the Settlement and makes determinations as

25
follows:
26
27
28

1
Case No. 17-CV-00551-LHK
ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

1
1.
2

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(2)(B) requires that the settling parties

provide class members with “the best notice that is practicable under the circumstances, including

3
individual notice to all members who can be identified through reasonable effort. The notice must
4
clearly and concisely state in plain, easily understood language: (i) the nature of the action; (ii) the
5
definition of the class certified; (iii) the class claims, issues, or defenses; (iv) that a class member
6
may enter an appearance through an attorney if the member so desires; (v) that the court will
7
exclude from the class any member who requests exclusion; (vi) the time and manner for
8
requesting exclusion; and (vii) the binding effect of a class judgment on members under Rule
9
10

23(c)(3).” The Court finds that the Notice Plan, which was direct notice sent to 99.8% of the
Settlement Class via email and U.S. Mail, has been implemented in compliance with this Court’s

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Order (ECF No. 426) and complies with Rule 23(c)(2)(B).
12
2.
13

On September 19, 2018, this Court issued a class certification order certifying a

class pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) defined as “[a]ll owners of non-

14
jailbroken Apple iPhone 4 or Apple iPhone 4S devices in California who on April 16, 2014, had
15

iOS 6 or earlier operating systems on their iPhone 4 or iPhone 4S devices.” ECF No. 269. On

16
September 10, 2020, this Court issued an Order preliminarily approving the Settlement and
17
finding that the proposed Settlement Class was consistent with the previously-certified class, and
18
therefore met the requirements of Rule 23. ECF No. 426. The Court finds that the Settlement Class
19
meets the Rule 23 requirements and certifies the Settlement Class.
20
3.

The Court further finds that the terms of the Settlement are fair, reasonable and

21
adequate to the Class and to each Class Member. Class Members who did not timely submit opt
22
out forms will be bound by the Settlement.
23
4.

The Court finds that the distribution plan is fair, adequate, and reasonable. Here,

24
the amount of payments to each participating Settlement Class Member will be calculated based
25

on each Settlement Class Member’s proportional share of the Net Settlement Fund, i.e., the Net

26
27
28

2
Case No. 17-CV-00551-LHK
ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

1
Settlement Fund balance divided by the total number of eligible devices. The vast majority of
2
Settlement Class Members will receive payment automatically without the need to file a claim
3
form.
4
5.

The Court finds that the claims administrator’s fees are fair and reasonable.

6.

The Settlement is ordered finally approved. All terms and provisions of the

5
6
Settlement should be and hereby are ordered to be consummated.
7
7.

Without affecting the finality of this order in any way, the Court retains jurisdiction

8
of all matters relating to the interpretation, administration, implementation, effectuation and
9
enforcement of this order and the Settlement.
10
IT IS SO ORDERED.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
Date: March 31, 2021
13
14
15

______________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3
Case No. 17-CV-00551-LHK
ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT