Moore et al v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. et al

Filing 31

ORDER GRANTING 24 UNOPPOSED MOTION TO APPOINT INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 2/7/24. (blflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/7/2024)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
7

KEVIN MOORE, et al.,

8

Plaintiffs,

9
10
11

Case No. 23-cv-05011-BLF
ORDER APPOINTING INTERIM
CLASS COUNSEL

v.
AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC.,
et al.,

[Re: ECF No. 24]

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendants.
12
13

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to appoint Capstone Law APC (“Capstone”) and

14

Berger Montague PC (“Berger”) as interim class counsel in this dispute concerning a defect

15

affecting certain Honda vehicles. See ECF No. 24 (“Mot.”). Defendants have filed a statement

16

that they do not oppose the relief requested in the motion. See ECF No. 25. For the following

17

reasons, the Court GRANTS this unopposed motion.

18

“Pursuant to Rule 23(g)(3), the court may designate interim counsel to act on behalf of a

19

putative class before determining whether to certify a class.” In re Seagate Tech. LLC Litig., No.

20

16-CV-00523-RMW, 2016 WL 3401989, at *2 (N.D. Cal. June 21, 2016). “Although Rule

21

23(g)(3) does not provide a standard for appointment of interim counsel, courts typically look to

22

the factors used in determining the adequacy of class counsel under Rule 23(g)(1)(A).” Id. These

23

factors are:

24
25
26

(1) the work counsel has done in identifying or investigating potential claims in the action;
(2) counsel’s experience in handling class actions, other complex litigation, and the types
of claims asserted in the action;
(3) counsel’s knowledge of the applicable law; and
(4) the resources that counsel will commit to representing the class.

27
28

Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(1)(A). The court may also consider “any other matter pertinent to counsel’s

1

ability to fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(1)(B).

2

The appointment of interim class counsel is discretionary and particularly suited to complex

3

actions. In re Seagate Tech. LLC Litig., 2016 WL 3401989, at *2.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

4

Here, the proposed interim class counsel have sufficiently demonstrated that they have

5

dedicated substantial resources to pursuing this case. In particular, proposed interim class counsel

6

have devoted considerable time and resources over the past three years to investigating and

7

litigating Browning v. Am. Honda Motor Co., Inc., No. 20-cv-05417-BLF (N.D. Cal. 2020), which

8

brought claims nearly identical to those in this case and which the Court consolidated into this

9

case. See ECF No. 19 (order consolidating cases). Proposed interim class counsel have also

10

sufficiently demonstrated that they have experience litigating complex class actions and are

11

knowledgeable about the applicable law given their extensive experience as plaintiff-side class

12

counsel in similar automobile defect cases. See ECF No. 24-2 (Capstone Resume); ECF No. 24-4

13

(Berger Resume). Finally, proposed interim class counsel have satisfied the Court that they will

14

commit sufficient intellectual and financial resources to represent the class. Mot. at 13.

15

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion and APPOINTS Capstone Law APC and

16

Berger Montague PC as interim class counsel.

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
20
21
22

Dated: February 7, 2024
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
2