RIAUBIA v. HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA
Filing
48
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT 42 IS GRANTED. SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE LYNNE A. SITARSKI ON 8/6/19. 8/7/19 ENTERED & E-MAILED.(fdc)
Case 2:16-cv-05150-CDJ Document 48 Filed 08/07/19 Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JOSHUA RIAUBIA, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
v.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA
Defendant.
CIVIL ACTION
No. 16-5150
ORDER
AND NOW, this
6TH
day of August, 2019, upon consideration of Plaintiff’s
Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement (ECF No. 42), and for
the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that
Plaintiff’s Motion is GRANTED.
It is hereby further ORDERED that:
1.
As described in the accompanying memorandum opinion, conditional Class
certification for the purposes of settlement is appropriate and meets the requirements of Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b), and the proposed Settlement Agreement is preliminarily
approved as it is fair, reasonable, and adequate under Rule 23(e).
2.
The Court conditionally certifies the following settlement class:
All persons or entities in the fifty United States and the District of
Columbia who currently own or lease, or previously owned or
leased, a model year 2015 to 2017 U.S. specification Hyundai
Sonata vehicle equipped with the Smart Trunk feature.
Excluded from the Settlement Class are Defendant, as well as
Defendant’s affiliates, employees, suppliers, officers, and directors,
attorneys, agents, insurers, and dealers; third-party providers of
extended warranty/service contracts; independent repair/service
facilities; the attorneys representing Defendant in this case; the
judges and mediator to whom this case is assigned and their
immediate family members; all persons and entities who request
exclusion from (opt-out of) the Settlement; all persons and entities
Case 2:16-cv-05150-CDJ Document 48 Filed 08/07/19 Page 2 of 3
who previously released any claims encompassed in this Settlement
or whose vehicle was permanently transported outside the United
States; and all persons or entities claiming personal injury or
property damage other than to a Class Vehicle or claiming
subrogation of such claims.
3.
Upon consideration of the factors in Rule 23(g), the Court appoints Plaintiff’s
Class Counsel to represent the Settlement Class as follows:
James C. Shah, Esquire; and Natalie J. Finkelman Bennett, Esquire
Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLP
35 East State Street
Media, PA 19063
Noah Axler, Esquire; and Marc Goldich, Esquire
Axler Goldich, LLC
1520 Locust Street, Suite 301
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Robert P. Cocco, Esquire
Robert P. Cocco, P.C.
1500 Walnut Street, Suite 900
Philadelphia, PA 19102
4.
The Court appoints Plaintiff Joseph Riaubia as representative of the certified
Settlement Class.
5.
The Court approves the Notice Plan, including the two proposed forms of notice,
(ECF No. 42-3, Ex. A (Claims Form), Ex. B (Notice Form)), and finds they are reasonable and
adequate and meet the requirements of Rule 23(c) and (e).
6.
The Court appoints Hyundai Motor America’s Consumer Affairs Division as the
Settlement Administrator, with the fees and costs of the Settlement Administrator to be borne by
Defendant as set forth in the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Administrator shall
implement the Notice Plan with all applicable deadlines.
7.
The motion for final approval of Settlement Agreement and any papers Plaintiff
or Defendant wishes to submit in support of final approval shall be filed with the Honorable C.
2
Case 2:16-cv-05150-CDJ Document 48 Filed 08/07/19 Page 3 of 3
Darnell Jones II as soon as practicable. The final fairness hearing will be scheduled by Judge
Jones in a future order.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lynne A. Sitarski
LYNNE A. SITARSKI
United States Magistrate Judge
3
.
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?