High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
L A W O F F I C E S O F
R U D Y , E X E L R O D & Z I E F F , L L P .
3 5 1 C A L I F O R N I A S T R E E T , S U I T E 7 0 0 S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 0 4 ( 4 1 5 ) 4 3 4 - 9 8 0 0
PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY SETTLEMENT APPROVALC
ASE
N
O
.
C-06-7776
SC
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728David A. Lowe (State Bar #178811)John T. Mullan (State Bar # 221149)RUDY, EXELROD & ZIEFF, L.L.P.351 California Street, Suite 700San Francisco, CA 94104Telephone: (415) 434-9800Facsimile: (415) 434-0513Email: dal@rezlaw.comEmail: jtm@rezlaw.comAttorneys for PlaintiffsUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTNORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIASAN FRANCISCO DIVISIONCase No. C-06-7776 SCRICHARD PRENTICE, CHRISTIANMILLER, and TIFFINEYPETHERBRIDGE, on their own behalf andon behalf of classes of those similarlysituated,Plaintiff,vs.FUND FOR PUBLIC INTERESTRESEARCH, INC.,Defendant.
/ PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF MOTIONAND MOTION FOR ORDER: (1)PROVISIONALLY CERTIFYINGSETTLEMENT CLASS; (2)PRELIMINARILY APPROVINGCLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT ANDPLAN OF DISTRIBUTION; (3)DIRECTING DISTRIBUTION OFNOTICE OF THE SETTLEMENT;AND (4) SETTING A SCHEDULEFOR THE FINAL SETTLEMENTAPPROVAL PROCESS;MEMORANDUM OF POINTS ANDAUTHORITIES IN SUPPORTTHEREOF
Date: February 6, 2009Time: 10:00 a.m.Court: Courtroom 1
Judge: Hon. Samuel Conti
Case3:06-cv-07776-SC Document99 Filed12/10/08 Page1 of 28
L A W O F F I C E S O F
R U D Y , E X E L R O D & Z I E F F , L L P .
3 5 1 C A L I F O R N I A S T R E E T , S U I T E 7 0 0 S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 0 4 ( 4 1 5 ) 4 3 4 - 9 8 0 0
1
PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY SETTLEMENT APPROVALC
ASE
N
O
.
C-06-7776
SC
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Plaintiffs Rich Prentice, Christian Miller, and TiffineyPetherbridge hereby do move the Court as follows:(1) To preliminarily approve the Settlement and Agreement;(2) To certify named Plaintiffs Rich Prentice, Christian Miller, and TiffineyPetherbridge as representatives of the FLSA Collective Action Class and the California Class,and Plaintiff Christian Miller as representative of the New York Class (“Class Representatives”);(3) To make appropriate findings regarding the previously conditionally certifiedFLSA Collective Action and to preliminarily certify the California and New York Classes forpurposes of settlement;(4) To appoint David A. Lowe, and John T. Mullan of Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff, LLP asClass Counsel;(5) To approve, and direct mailing of, the proposed Class Notice (including notice of the right to opt-out of the Classes);(6) To schedule a fairness hearing on the question of whether the proposed settlementshould be finally approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate as to the members of the SettlementClasses; and(7) To preliminarily approve service payments to the Class Representatives and costsof administration payable to the Claims Administrator.This motion is based on the Complaint, the Stipulation of Settlement and Release, theMemorandum of Points and Authorities, and the Declaration of David A. Lowe filed herewith insupport of this Motion; the other records, pleadings, and papers filed in this action; and upon suchother documentary and oral evidence or argument as may be presented to the Court at the hearingof this Motion.Respectfully submitted,Dated: December 10, 2008 By:
/s_David A. Lowe
David A. LoweAttorneys for Plaintiffs
Case3:06-cv-07776-SC Document99 Filed12/10/08 Page2 of 28
L A W O F F I C E S O F
R U D Y , E X E L R O D & Z I E F F , L L P .
3 5 1 C A L I F O R N I A S T R E E T , S U I T E 7 0 0 S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 0 4 ( 4 1 5 ) 4 3 4 - 9 8 0 0
i
PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY SETTLEMENT APPROVALC
ASE
N
O
.
C-06-7776
SC
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page(s)NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION..........................................................................................1MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES..................................................................1I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................1II. HISTORY AND STATUS OF THE CASE.........................................................................2III. SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT TERMS..........................................................................3IV. CLASS CERTIFICATION OF PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS UNDER RULE 23 ISAPPROPRIATE...................................................................................................................6A. The California and New York Classes Each Meet the Requirements of Rule 23(a).................................................................................................................71. Numerosity...................................................................................................72. Commonality................................................................................................73. Typicality......................................................................................................84. Adequacy......................................................................................................8B. The Proposed Settlement Classes Meet the Requirements of Rule 23(b)(3).........10C. The Previously-Certified FLSA Collective Action Should be Limited tothose who Filed Consents to Join the Litigation and who Worked for FundPrior to May 7, 2007, and This Court Should Toll the Statute of Limitations for Those Individuals who Filed Consents to Join theLitigation and who Worked for Fund After May 7, 2007......................................10V. PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL SHOULD BE APPOINTED AS CLASS COUNSEL...........12VI. THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT MERITS PRELIMINARY APPROVAL..................12A. The Terms of the Proposed Settlement Are Fair....................................................131. The Settlement Is The Product of Serious, Arms-Length, InformedNegotiations................................................................................................142. The Payments to the Named Representatives For Their Service tothe Class Are Reasonable and Routinely Awarded....................................143. The Proposed Plan of Distribution is Fair and Reasonable........................15B. The Settlement Falls Within the Range of Reasonableness...................................17
Case3:06-cv-07776-SC Document99 Filed12/10/08 Page3 of 28
Add a Comment