Kavra v. Health Insurance Innovations, Inc. et al

Filing 184

ORDER: The report and recommendation (Doc. 183) is affirmed and adopted and incorporated by reference into this Order for all purposes, including appellate review. Lead Plaintiff Robert Rector's Unopposed Motion for (1) Final Approval of Settlement and (2) Plan of Allocation (Doc. 166) is hereby granted. Lead Counsel's Unopposed (1) Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees and Reimbursement of Expenses and (2) Lead Plaintiff's Request for Reimbursement of Reasonable Cos ts and Expenses (Doc. 167) is hereby granted. If the parties wish, they may submit a proposed stipulated form of final judgment or stipulation of dismissal on or before April 30, 2021. The Clerk is directed to terminate any pending motions and deadlines, and thereafter close this case. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Thomas P. Barber on 3/30/2021.(ANL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
IN RE HEALTH INSURANCE
INNOVATIONS SECURITIES
LITIGATION
____________________________________/

Case No. 8:17-cv-2186-TPB-SPF

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on the report and recommendation of Sean P.
Flynn, United States Magistrate Judge. (Doc. 183). Lead Plaintiff Robert Rector
alleges, among other things, that Defendants Health Insurance Innovations, Inc.
(“HIIQ” or the “Company”) and its Chief Financial Officer Michael D. Hershberger
(collectively, “Defendants”) violated federal securities laws by failing to disclose
facts regarding the Company’s unsuccessful application for its third-party
administrator license with the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation and the risks
these facts posed to the Company’s business, prospects, and operations. Lead
Plaintiff further alleges that these material misstatements or omissions in HIIQ’s
public filings, press releases, or other public statements resulted in the prices of
HIIQ securities to be artificially inflated, causing investors to suffer damages.
The parties reached a settlement and now move for final approval of their
settlement agreement and dismissal of the litigation on a class-action basis. See
(Doc. 166). Judge Flynn recommends the motion be granted. Lead counsel has also
moved for an award of attorney’s fees and reimbursement of reasonable costs and
expenses (Doc. 167), which Judge Flynn recommends be granted. The pending
motions are unopposed.

Page 1 of 4

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge’s
report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983);
Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982). A district court must “make a
de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which an
objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). When no objection is filed, a court reviews
the report and recommendation for clear error. Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781,
784 (11th Cir. 2006); Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 409 (5th Cir. 1982).

After careful consideration of the record, including Judge Flynn’s report and
recommendation, the Court adopts the report and recommendation. The Court
agrees with Judge Flynn’s detailed and well-reasoned factual findings and legal
conclusions, including that the purported class meets all of the Rule 23(a)
prerequisites and satisfies Rule 23(b)(3); that the notice to the class was reasonable
and the best notice practicable; and that the Settlement Agreement Is fair,
reasonable, and adequate. The Court also agrees with Judge Flynn that an award
of $924,000 (or 33%) of the Settlement Fund is reasonable under the circumstances
of this case, and that Class Counsel is entitled to his claimed expenses totaling
$245,631.85, plus interest. In addition, the Court agrees that an incentive award of
$3,125 to Mr. Rector as the Lead Plaintiff is reasonable, consistent with the
incentive awards approved in other class actions in this district, and adequately
recognizes his efforts to obtain recovery for the Settlement Class.

Page 2 of 4

Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
1. The report and recommendation (Doc. 183) is AFFIRMED and
ADOPTED and INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE into this Order
for all purposes, including appellate review.
2. Lead Plaintiff Robert Rector’s Unopposed Motion for (1) Final Approval of
Settlement and (2) Plan of Allocation (Doc. 166) is hereby GRANTED.
3. Lead Counsel’s Unopposed (1) Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and
Reimbursement of Expenses and (2) Lead Plaintiff’s Request for
Reimbursement of Reasonable Costs and Expenses (Doc. 167) is hereby
GRANTED.
4. Consistent with the Court’s preliminary class certification, final
certification of the Settlement Class is GRANTED for the purposes of
settlement.
5. The Settlement Agreement is APPROVED as a fair, adequate, and
reasonable resolution of the class members’ claims.
6. Class Counsel is awarded $924,000 in reasonable attorney’s fees. Class
Counsel is further awarded $245,631.85, plus interest, in reasonable costs.
These awards are to be paid from the Settlement Fund.
7. Lead Plaintiff Robert Rector is awarded a service award of $3,125.
8. If the parties wish, they may submit a proposed stipulated form of final
judgment or stipulation of dismissal on or before April 30, 2021.

Page 3 of 4

9. The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate any pending motions and
deadlines, and thereafter close this case.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this 30th day of
March, 2021.

TOM BARBER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 4 of 4