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)

Download PDF
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 (702) 383-6085 Fax (702) 385-1827 leongreenberg@overtimelaw.com dana@overtimelaw.com CHRISTIAN GABROY, ESQ. SBN 8805 Gabroy Law Offices 170 South Green Valley Pkwy- Suite 280 Henderson, Nevada 89012 Tel (702) 259-7777 Fax (702) 259-7704 CHRISTIAN@GABROY.COM 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-

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?