SPARKS v. MILLS et al
Filing
48
ORDER APPROVING JOINT MOTION TO GIVE NOTICE TO THE CLASS OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND TO MAKE FURTHER ORDERS AS PART OF THE SETTLEMENT APPROVAL PROCESS re: 47 Motion By JUDGE LANCE E. WALKER. (CJD)
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 48 Filed 05/10/22 Page 1 of 5
PageID #: 359
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
MARC SPARKS, on behalf of himself
and all those similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
v.
JANET MILLS, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 2:20-cv-190-LEW
ORDER APPROVING JOINT MOTION TO GIVE NOTICE TO THE CLASS OF
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND TO MAKE FURTHER ORDERS AS PART OF
THE SETTLEMENT APPROVAL PROCESS
Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Give Notice to the Class of Proposed
Settlement and to Make Further Orders as Part of the Settlement Approval Process (ECF
No. 47). Following review of the Motion, the Settlement Agreement and Release, 1 and the
motion record, I now order and find, on a preliminary basis only, as follows:
1.
The parties have made the required “showing that the court will likely be able
to: (i) approve the proposal under Rule 23(e)(2); and (ii) certify the class for purposes of
judgment on the proposal.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(1)(B). The Court determines, on a
preliminary basis only, that the proposed settlement likely is fair, reasonable, adequate, and
is in the best interest of the settlement class, and that the Settlement Agreement likely was
This Order incorporates by reference the definitions and terms in the Settlement Agreement and Release
so that they have the same meaning in this Order.
1
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 48 Filed 05/10/22 Page 2 of 5
PageID #: 360
the result of arm’s-length negotiations by experienced counsel. The Court further
determines, on a preliminary basis, that it is likely to be able to grant class certification
because the requirements of Rule 23(a) and 23(b)(3) have been met.
The Court recognizes certification under this Order is for settlement purposes only,
and shall not constitute, or be construed as, an admission by Defendants that this action is
appropriate for class certification for any other purpose. If, for any reason, the Settlement
is not granted final approval, entry of this Order is without prejudice to the rights of
Defendants to oppose certification of the Named Plaintiff’s claims as a class action.
2.
The Court directs notice of the proposed settlement to the class as set forth
in the parties proposed Class Settlement Notice, which provides notice in a reasonable
manner and fairly and adequately advises Class Members of the terms of the proposed
Settlement and the benefits it would provide to Class Members; their right to object to or
opt out of the Class and the procedures for doing so; their right to file documentation in
support of or in opposition to the Settlement and procedures for doing so; the date, time
and location of the Final Approval Hearing; and the procedures that Class Members must
follow to be heard at the Final Approval Hearing. The Court further finds that the Notice
comports with all Constitutional requirements including those of due process.
3.
The Court APPOINTS Plaintiff’s Counsel, Carol J. Garvan of the ACLU of
Maine and David G. Webbert of Johnson & Webbert, LLP, as class counsel.
4.
The Court APPOINTS Named Plaintiff Marc Sparks as class representative.
2
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 48 Filed 05/10/22 Page 3 of 5
5.
PageID #: 361
Consistent with the Settlement Agreement and Release and the approved
Notice to the Class of the proposed Settlement, this Order establishes the following
deadlines:
a. Within 3 business days after entry of this Order, the Parties will provide
to the Settlement Administrator, and to each other, last known U.S. mail and
email address, phone number, and Social Security number for each Settlement
Class Member.
b. Within 21 calendar days of entry of this Order, the Settlement
Administrator will send the Notice of Settlement to each Settlement Class
Member by U.S. first class mail at the Member’s current U.S. mail address, and
by email if an email address is available. The Court finds that mailing the Notice
to the present and/or last known mail and email addresses of the Class Members
constitutes an effective method of notifying Class Members of the Litigation,
the proposed Settlement, and their rights with respect to it. The Court finds that
the mailing and emailing of notices to Class Members as set forth in this
paragraph is the best means practicable by which to reach Class Members and is
reasonable and adequate in accord with all constitutional and statutory
requirements, including all due process requirements.
c. Within 7 calendar days of receiving notice from the U.S. Postal Service
that a Notice of Settlement was undeliverable, the Settlement Administrator will,
after using up-to-date practices to determine a current U.S. mail address, re-mail
the Notice of Settlement if a new address is found.
3
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 48 Filed 05/10/22 Page 4 of 5
PageID #: 362
d. Within 45 calendar days from the mailing of the Notice of Settlement,
any request to opt out of the Settlement, containing the information required by
the Notice of Settlement, must be timely postmarked and mailed to the
Settlement Administrator. Any Settlement Class Member who does not provide
a timely notice of opting out that complies with the Notice of Settlement, or who
provides such notice but then rescinds it, shall be bound by the terms of the
Settlement if finally approved by the Court.
e. Within 45 calendar days from the mailing of the Notice of Settlement,
any objection to the Settlement, containing the information required by the
Notice of Settlement, must be timely postmarked and mailed to the Settlement
Administrator.
f. No later than 14 days before the Final Approval Hearing, the parties will
file a joint motion for final approval of the proposed Settlement.
g. No later than 14 days before the Final Approval Hearing, Class Counsel
will file a motion for approval of attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses.
6.
The Court APPROVES the designation of Simpluris, Inc. as Settlement
Administrator, and the payment of reasonable settlement administration costs to be paid as
set forth in the Settlement Agreement.
7.
On August 24, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1 at the Edward T. Gignoux
United States Courthouse, 156 Federal Street, Portland, Maine 04101, counsel for the
parties must appear before the undersigned for a Final Approval Hearing, at which the
Court will consider whether the proposed settlement “is fair, reasonable and adequate” in
4
Case 2:20-cv-00190-LEW Document 48 Filed 05/10/22 Page 5 of 5
PageID #: 363
accord with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(2), and to consider the motion of Class Counsel for an
award of reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses.
8.
All proceedings in this matter—except those authorized by this Order and in
the Settlement Agreement or in furtherance of the proposed settlement—are stayed until
further notice.
SO ORDERED.
Dated this 10th day of May, 2022.
/s/ Lance E. Walker
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
5
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?