SCOVIL et al v. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM INC

Filing 234

PROCEDURAL ORDER - By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mnw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
WAYNE SCOVIL,

ET AL.,

PLAINTIFFS
v.
FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE
SYSTEM, INC. d/b/a FedEx
Home Delivery,
DEFENDANT

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

NO. 1:10-CV-515-DBH

PROCEDURAL ORDER
Now that the parties have filed a Joint Notice of Proposed Class Action
Settlement, I DIRECT the Clerk’s Office to schedule a preliminary hearing for
early September as the Court’s calendar permits. I draw the lawyers’ attention
to the following modifications to what they have requested.
1.

This hearing is not for “preliminary approval” of the impending

proposed settlement.
consult PRINCIPLES

OF

It is simply a preliminary review.

Counsel should

AGGREGATE LITIGATION § 3.03 (2010) and its comments for

the significance of the distinction. See also In re New Motor Vehicles Canadian
Export Antitrust Litig., 236 F.R.D. 53, 55-56, n.2 (D. Me. 2006); Nilsen v. York
Cnty., 228 F.R.D. 60, 62 (D. Me. 2005) (“Because a judicial declaration of
‘preliminary fairness' unjustifiably suggests a built-in headwind against
objections to the settlement, I am determining simply whether the proposed
settlement agreement deserves consideration by the class and whether the

notice is appropriate. I reserve all determinations of the proposed settlement's
fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy until the [final fairness] hearing.”);
2.

Submission of materials shall be at least seven (7) calendar days

before the hearing;
3.

The submitted materials shall address the factors in Fed. R. Civ. P.

23(e)(1)-(4); and
4.

Counsel shall address whether there are any differences to

consider for the collective action part of the case.
SO ORDERED.
DATED THIS 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2013
/S/D. BROCK HORNBY
D. BROCK HORNBY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2