Jones v. Regal Cinemas, Inc.

Filing 42

FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, DECREED, AND ADJUDGED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Terms and phrases in this Final Judgment shall have the same meaning as ascribed to them in the Parties' Class Action Settlement Agreement. 2. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Action and over all Parties to the Action, including all Settlement Class Members, as further set forth. 8. Accordingly, the Settlement is hereby finally approved in all respec ts.9. The Parties are hereby directed to implement the Settlement Agreement accordingto its terms and provisions. The Settlement Agreement is hereby incorporated into this FinalJudgment in full and shall have the full force of an Order of this Court. 10. This Court hereby dismisses the Action on the merits and with prejudice, as further set forth. 13. The Court has also considered Plaintiff's Motion For Attorneys' Fees, Costs, Expenses, And Service Award, as well as the supporting memor andum of law and declarations (ECF Nos. 33-36), and adjudges that the payment of attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses in the amount of $833,333.33 is reasonable in light of the multi-factor test used to evaluate fee awards in the Secon d Circuit. See Goldberger v. Integrated Resources, Inc., 209 F.3d 43, 50 (2d Cir. 2000). Such payment shall be made pursuant to and in the manner provided by the terms of the Settlement Agreement. 20. This Court hereby directs entry of this Final Judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58 based upon the Court's finding that there is no just reason for delay of enforcement or appeal of this Final Judgment, and hereby dismisses this Action with prejudice, with each party to bear their own costs, except as provided in this Order or in the Settlement Agreement. IT IS SO ORDERED (Signed by Judge Margaret M. Garnett on 3/6/2025) (mml)

Case 1:23-cv-11145-MMG

Document 42

Filed 03/06/25

Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
TIM JONES, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated,
v.

Plaintiff,

3/6/2025

Civil Action No.: 1:23-cv-11145-MMG

REGAL CINEMAS, INC.,
Defendant.

[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT AND
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
WHEREAS, a class action is pending before the Court entitled Jones v. Regal Cinemas,
Inc., No. 1:23-cv-11145-MMG; and
WHEREAS, Plaintiff Tim Jones, and Defendant Regal Cinemas, Inc. (“Defendant”) have
entered into a Class Action Settlement Agreement, which, together with the exhibits attached
thereto, sets forth the terms and conditions for a proposed settlement and dismissal of the Action
with prejudice as to Defendant upon the terms and conditions set forth therein (the “Settlement
Agreement”) (ECF No. 30-1); and
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2024, the Court granted Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary
Approval of Class Action Settlement, conditionally certifying a Class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
23(b)(3) of “all individuals in the United States who purchased electronic tickets to any film
screening in any of Defendant’s cinemas located in New York state from Defendant’s Website
from July 31, 2023 to and through July 15, 2024, using the guest checkout process”; and
WHEREAS, nothing has occurred since the entry of the Preliminary Approval Order
which causes this Court to alter the findings it made in the Preliminary Approval Order in
support of the approval of the settlement entered into between the Parties; and

Case 1:23-cv-11145-MMG

Document 42

Filed 03/06/25

Page 2 of 7

WHEREAS, the Court has considered the Parties’ Class Action Settlement Agreement
(ECF No. 30-1), as well as Plaintiff’s Motion for Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement
(ECF No. 37), Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Costs, Expenses, And Service Award (ECF
No. 33), together with all exhibits thereto, the arguments and authorities presented by the Parties
and their counsel at the Final Approval Hearing held on March 5, 2025, and the record in the
Action, and good cause appearing;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, DECREED, AND ADJUDGED AS FOLLOWS:
1.

Terms and phrases in this Final Judgment shall have the same meaning as ascribed

to them in the Parties’ Class Action Settlement Agreement.
2.

This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Action and over all Parties

to the Action, including all Settlement Class Members.
3.

The Notice provided to the Settlement Class pursuant to the Settlement Agreement

(ECF No. 30-1) and order granting Preliminary Approval (ECF No. 32) – including (i) direct notice
to the Settlement Class via email, based on the comprehensive Settlement Class List provided by
Defendant, and (ii) the creation of the Settlement Website – fully complied with the requirements
of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 and due process, and was reasonably calculated under the circumstances to
apprise the Settlement Class of the pendency of the Action, their right to object to or to exclude
themselves from the Settlement Agreement, and their right to appear at the Final Approval
Hearing.
4.

The Court finds that Defendant properly and timely notified the appropriate

government officials of the Settlement Agreement, pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act of
2005 (“CAFA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1715. The Court has reviewed the substance of Defendant’s notice
and finds that it complied with all applicable requirements of CAFA. Further, more than ninety

2

Case 1:23-cv-11145-MMG

Document 42

Filed 03/06/25

Page 3 of 7

(90) days have elapsed since Defendant provided notice pursuant to CAFA and the Final Approval
Hearing.
5.

This Court now gives final approval to the Settlement Agreement, and finds that

the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best interests of the Settlement
Class. The settlement consideration provided under the Settlement Agreement constitutes fair
value given in exchange for the release of the Released Claims against the Released Parties. The
Court finds that the consideration to be paid to members of the Settlement Class is reasonable, and
in the best interests of the Settlement Class Members, considering the total value of their claims
compared to (i) the disputed factual and legal circumstances of the Action, (ii) affirmative defenses
asserted in the Action, and (iii) the potential risks and likelihood of success of pursuing litigation
on the merits. The complex legal and factual posture of this case, the parties’ exchange of relevant
information, and the fact that the Settlement is the result of arms-length negotiations between the
Parties support this finding. The Court finds that these facts, in addition to the Court’s observations
throughout the litigation, demonstrate that there was no collusion present in the reaching of the
Settlement Agreement, implicit or otherwise.
6.

The Court has specifically considered the factors relevant to class action settlement

approval, including:
(1) the complexity, expense and likely duration of the litigation; (2)
the reaction of the class to the settlement; (3) the stage of the
proceedings and the amount of discovery completed; (4) the risks of
establishing liability; (5) the risks of establishing damages; (6) the
risks of maintaining the class action through trial; (7) the ability of
defendants to withstand a greater judgment; (8) the range of
reasonableness of the settlement fund in light of the best possible
recovery; and (9) the range of reasonableness of the settlement fund
to a possible recovery in light of all the attendant risks of litigation.
City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corp., 495 F.2d 448 (2d Cir. 1974); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e).

3

Case 1:23-cv-11145-MMG

7.

Document 42

Filed 03/06/25

Page 4 of 7

The Court finds that the Class Representative and Class Counsel adequately

represented the Settlement Class for the purposes of litigating this matter and entering into and
implementing the Settlement Agreement.
8.

Accordingly, the Settlement is hereby finally approved in all respects.

9.

The Parties are hereby directed to implement the Settlement Agreement according

to its terms and provisions. The Settlement Agreement is hereby incorporated into this Final
Judgment in full and shall have the full force of an Order of this Court.
10.

This Court hereby dismisses the Action on the merits and with prejudice.

11.

Upon the Effective Date of this Final Judgment, Plaintiff and each and every

Settlement Class Member who did not opt out of the Settlement Class (whether or not such
members submit claims), including such individuals’ respective present, past, and future heirs,
executors, estates, administrators, representatives, beneficiaries, predecessors, successors, assigns,
parent companies, subsidiaries, associates, affiliates, employers, employees, agents, consultants,
independent contractors, insurers, directors, managing directors, officers, partners, principals,
members, attorneys, accountants, financial and other advisors, underwriters, shareholders, lenders,
auditors, investment advisors, legal representatives, successors in interest, assigns, and companies,
firms, trusts, and corporations (the “Releasing Parties”) shall be deemed to have released
Defendant, as well as any and all of its current, former, and future parents, predecessors,
successors, affiliates, subsidiaries, divisions, or related corporate entities, and all of their respective
current, future, and former employees, officers, directors, shareholders, members, managers,
representatives, assignees, accountants, sales and/or customer service agents, joint venturers,
fiduciaries, beneficiaries, insurers, reinsurers, principals, trustees, administrators, executors,
attorneys, and customers (collectively “Released Parties”), from any and all actual, potential, filed,

4

Case 1:23-cv-11145-MMG

Document 42

Filed 03/06/25

Page 5 of 7

known or unknown, fixed or contingent, claimed or unclaimed, suspected or unsuspected, claims,
demands, liabilities, rights, causes of action, suits, liens, judgments, costs, contracts or agreements,
extra contractual claims, damages, punitive, exemplary or multiplied damages, expenses, costs,
attorneys’ fees, obligations, and all other legal responsibilities, whether in law or in equity, accrued
or un-accrued, direct, individual or representative, of every nature and description whatsoever,
whether based on the ACAL or other state, federal, local, statutory or common law or any other
law, rule, ordinance, claim, or regulation, whether past, present, or future, against the Released
Parties, or any of them, based upon, arising out of, or otherwise relating to any facts, transactions,
events, matters, occurrences, acts, disclosures, statements, representations, omissions or failures
to act regarding the alleged collection and retention by Defendant of fees in connection with
electronic ticket sales from July 31, 2023, through and including July 15, 2024, including but not
limited to all claims that were brought or could have been brought in the Action relating to any
and all Releasing Parties.
12.

Upon the Effective Date of this Final Judgment, the above release of claims and the

Settlement Agreement will be binding on, and will have res judicata and preclusive effect on, all
pending and future lawsuits or other proceedings maintained by or on behalf of Plaintiff and all
other Settlement Class Members and Releasing Parties. All Settlement Class Members are hereby
permanently barred and enjoined from filing, commencing, prosecuting, intervening in, or
participating (as class members or otherwise) in any lawsuit or other action in any jurisdiction
based on or arising out of any of the Released Claims.
13.

The Court has also considered Plaintiff’s Motion For Attorneys’ Fees, Costs,

Expenses, And Service Award, as well as the supporting memorandum of law and declarations
(ECF Nos. 33-36), and adjudges that the payment of attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses in the

5

Case 1:23-cv-11145-MMG

Document 42

Filed 03/06/25

Page 6 of 7

amount of $833,333.33 is reasonable in light of the multi-factor test used to evaluate fee awards
in the Second Circuit. See Goldberger v. Integrated Resources, Inc., 209 F.3d 43, 50 (2d Cir.
2000). Such payment shall be made pursuant to and in the manner provided by the terms of the
Settlement Agreement.
14.

The Court has also considered Plaintiff’s Motion, memorandum of law, and

supporting declarations for an incentive award to the Class Representative, Tim Jones. See ECF
Nos. 33-36. The Court adjudges that the payment of an incentive award in the amount of $5,000
to the Class Representative to compensate him for his efforts and commitment on behalf of the
Settlement Class, is fair, reasonable, and justified under the circumstances of this case. Such
payment shall be made pursuant to and in the manner provided by the terms of the Settlement
Agreement.
15.

All payments made to Settlement Class Members pursuant to the Settlement

Agreement that are not negotiated within one hundred and eighty (180) days of issuance shall
revert to the Legal Aid Society, which the Court approves as an appropriate cy pres recipient.
Except as otherwise set forth in this Order, the Parties shall bear their own costs and attorneys’
fees.
16.

The Parties, without further approval from the Court, are hereby permitted to agree

and adopt such amendments, modifications, and expansions of the Settlement Agreement and its
implementing documents (including all exhibits to the Settlement Agreement), including
extensions of time, so long as they are consistent in all material respects with this Final Judgment
and do not limit the rights of Settlement Class Members.
17.

If this Final Judgment is reversed or vacated on appeal, or the Settlement

Agreement is terminated pursuant to its terms, all orders entered in connection herewith shall be

6

Case 1:23-cv-11145-MMG

Document 42

Filed 03/06/25

Page 7 of 7