Ibarra v. RMC &S Corp et al

Filing 72

ORDER Granting 65 Motion for Final Approval to Class Action Settlement. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 6/5/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

LEON GREENBERG, ESQ. SBN 8094
DANA SNIEGOCKI, ESQ. SBN 11715
Leon Professional Corporation
2965 S. Jones Blvd - Suite E3
Las Vegas, Nevada 89146
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
CHRISTIAN GABROY, ESQ. SBN 8805
Gabroy Law Offices
170 South Green Valley Pkwy- Suite 280
Henderson, Nevada 89012
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

14
15

MARIA ISABEL IBARRA, an
individual, on behalf of herself and all
persons similarly situated,
Plaintiff,

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

vs.

Case No. 2:15-cv-01479-RFB-PAL
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
FINAL APPROVAL TO CLASS
ACTION SETTLEMENT

RMC & S CORP. a/k/a and d/b/a
DELUXE CLEANERS &
ALTERATIONS, a corporation;
JOHNNY CORONEL, an individual;
MARY CORONEL, an individual;
RAFAEL CORONEL, an individual;
SEBASTIAN CORONEL, an individual;
EMPLOYEE(S)/ AGENT(S) DOES 1-10;
AND ROE CORPORATIONS 11-20,
INCLUSIVE,
Defendants.
On November 28, 2016, the Court took under submission, the parties'
unopposed motion for final approval of the class action settlement and forth in the
Stipulation and Settlement Agreement of Claims (“Stipulation”), in the above
-1-

1

-captioned action and the Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for an award of a Named

2

Plaintiff Service Award and for a Fee and Expense Award for Plaintiffs’

3

Counsel as provided for in the Stipulation. The Court finds and orders as follows:

4
5
6

1. For the purposes of this Order, the Court adopts all defined terms as
set forth in the Stipulation, previously filed with this Court.

7
8
9

2. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this litigation
and over all parties and Class Members in this litigation.

10
11

3. The Court finds that the distribution of the Notice of Class Action

12

Settlement, which was carried out pursuant to the Stipulation, constituted the best

13

notice practicable under the circumstances and fully met the requirements of due

14

process.

15
16

4. The Court finds that zero (0) Class Members have objected to the

17

Settlement.

18

Settlement. That person is Paolah Guaman and is not subject to any of the

19

provisions of the Settlement. The Court also finds that two (2) class members

20

presumptively did not be receive the Notice of the Settlement and therefore are not

21

subject to any of the provisions of the Settlement. Those persons are Gloria Peralta

22

and Raul Morales.

One (1) Class Member has timely requested exclusion from the

23
24

5. The Court finds that the Stipulation was the product of protracted,

25

arm’s length negotiations between experienced counsel.

26

Defendants’ potential exposure, the likelihood of success on the class claims, the

27

risk, expense, complexity and delay associated with further litigation, the risk of

28

maintaining class certification through trial, the experience and views of Plaintiffs’
-2-

After considering

1

Counsel, and the reaction of the Class to the Settlement, as well as other relevant

2

factors, the Court finds that the settlement, as set forth in the Stipulation, is fair,

3

reasonable, and in the best interests of the Class, and hereby grants final approval of

4

the settlement. The parties are ordered to carry out the settlement as provided in the

5

Stipulation.

6
7

6. As counsel for the Class, Leon Greenberg and Dana Sniegocki of

8

Leon Greenberg Professional Corporation and Christian Gabroy of the Gabroy Law

9

Office, shall be paid a combined fees and costs payment of $35,000.00 from the

10

Settlement Fund, to be paid in installments as specified in paragraphs 57 through 59

11

of the Stipulation, for their services on behalf of the Plaintiff and the Class.

12
13

7. As the Settlement Administrator, Rust Consulting shall be paid from

14

the Settlement Fund for their services rendered in administering the Settlement, in

15

accordance with the Stipulation and as provided in this paragraph. Pursuant to the

16

declaration of its Project Manager, Bruce Holt, submitted to this Court, its estimated

17

maximum costs for administration of the settlement of this matter is $13,000.00. Its

18

payment of costs in that amount from the Settlement Fund, to be paid in installments

19

as specified in paragraphs 57 through 59 of the Stipulation, is approved, provided

20

that it shall receive a lesser amount, if any, that is equal to the actual charges

21

properly paid to it for the services it provides in completing the administration of the

22

Settlement.

23

8. Except as stated in this Order all other terms of the Settlement will

24

remain as stated in the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement of Claims and all

25

accompanying documents and the Orders of this Court.

26
27
28

9. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter a Final Judgment of
dismissal and the Complaint is dismissed with prejudice.
-3-

1
2

10. The Court will retain jurisdiction for purposes of enforcing this

3

Settlement, addressing settlement administration matters, and addressing such post-

4

judgment matters as may be appropriate under court rules or applicable law.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8
9

RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
United States District Judge

10
11

DATED: June 5, 2017.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-