Declaration of David A. Rosenfeld Filed on Behalf of Robbins Geller
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Case 1:17-cv-05753-JGK Document 188 Filed 08/10/21 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x CARRIE SCHEUFELE, JEFFREY : Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-05753-JGK SCHEUFELE and NICHOLAS ORAM, : Individually and on Behalf of All Others : CLASS ACTION Similarly Situated, : : DECLARATION OF DAVID A. Plaintiffs, : ROSENFELD FILED ON BEHALF OF : ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD vs. : LLP IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR : AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND TABLEAU SOFTWARE, INC., CHRISTIAN : EXPENSES CHABOT, THOMAS WALKER, PATRICK : HANRAHAN and CHRISTOPHER STOLTE, : : Defendants. : x Case 1:17-cv-05753-JGK Document 188 Filed 08/10/21 Page 2 of 9 I, DAVID A. ROSENFELD, declare as follows: 1. I am a member of the firm of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP (“Robbins Geller” or the “Firm”). I am submitting this declaration in support of my Firm’s application for an award of attorneys’ fees, expenses and charges (“expenses”) in connection with services rendered in the above-entitled action (the “Litigation”). 2. This Firm is Lead Counsel of record for Lead Plaintiff United Association National Pension Fund (formerly known as The Plumbers and Pipefitters National Pension Fund) and the Class herein. 3. The information in this declaration regarding the Firm’s time and expenses is taken from time and expense reports and supporting documentation prepared and/or maintained by the Firm in the ordinary course of business. I am the partner who oversaw and/or conducted the day-to- day activities in the Litigation and I reviewed these reports (and backup documentation where necessary or appropriate) in connection with the preparation of this declaration. The purpose of this review was to confirm both the accuracy of the entries on the printouts as well as the necessity for, and reasonableness of, the time and expenses committed to the Litigation. As a result of this review, reductions were made to both time and expenses in the exercise of billing judgment. Based on this review and the adjustments made, I believe that the time reflected in the Firm’s lodestar calculation and the expenses for which payment is sought herein are reasonable and were necessary for the effective and efficient prosecution and resolution of the Litigation. In addition, I believe that these expenses are reasonable and were necessary for the effective and efficient prosecution and resolution of the Litigation. 4. After the reductions referred to above, the number of hours spent on the Litigation by the Firm is 18,990.20. A breakdown of the lodestar is provided in the attached Exhibit A. The - 1 - Case 1:17-cv-05753-JGK Document 188 Filed 08/10/21 Page 3 of 9 lodestar amount for attorney/paraprofessional time based on the Firm’s 2021 rates is $12,430,152.75. The hourly rates shown in Exhibit A are the Firm’s regular 2021 rates in contingent cases set by the Firm for each individual. These hourly rates are consistent with hourly rates submitted by the Firm to state and federal courts during 2021 in other securities class action litigation. The Firm’s rates are set based on periodic analysis of rates charged by firms performing comparable work both on the plaintiff and defense side. For personnel who are no longer employed by the Firm, the “current rate” used for the lodestar calculation is based upon the rate for that person in his or her final year of employment with the Firm. 5. The Firm seeks an award of $1,040,478.69 in expenses and charges in connection with the prosecution of the Litigation. Those expenses and charges are summarized by category in the attached Exhibit B. 6. The following is additional information regarding certain of these expenses: (a) Filing, Witness and Other Fees: $7,295.19. These expenses have been paid to the Court for filing fees and to attorney service firms or individuals who either: (i) served process of the complaint or subpoenas; or (ii) obtained copies of court documents for plaintiffs. The vendors who were paid for these services are set forth in the attached Exhibit C. (b) Class Action Notices: $110,192.76. This amount represents the costs of printing and mailing the Notice of Pendency of Class Action to Class Members and publishing a summary notice pursuant to the Court’s Order of May 12, 2020 (Dkt. No. 144). (c) Transportation, Hotels & Meals: $103,031.61. In connection with the prosecution of this case, the Firm has paid for travel expenses to, among other things, attend court hearings, meet with witnesses, mediators and opposing counsel and take or defend depositions. The date, destination and purpose of each trip is set forth in the attached Exhibit D. - 2 - Case 1:17-cv-05753-JGK Document 188 Filed 08/10/21 Page 4 of 9 (d) Court Hearing Transcripts and Deposition Reporting, Transcripts and Videography: $77,144.74. The vendors who were paid for these services are listed in the attached Exhibit E. (e) Experts/Consultants: $547,787.50. (i) Tasta Group (dba Caliber Advisors, Inc.) (“Caliber”): $237,787.50. Lead Plaintiff retained the services of Caliber, a valuations and economic consulting firm and its managing director, Bjorn Steinholt, CFA, to assist in financial analysis of materiality, loss causation, market efficiency, and damages. Caliber specializes in financial analyses and related economic consulting services with Mr. Steinholt having more than 25 years of experience providing capital markets consulting. Mr. Steinholt provided Lead Plaintiff with substantial assistance in its economic analysis in the initial investigation, estimation of damages, and loss causation allegations, provided an expert declaration on allegations related to market efficiency in connection with Lead Plaintiff’s successful motion for class certification, and provided a report addressing issues that Lead Plaintiff intended to prove at trial, including materiality, loss causation, and damages. During the Litigation, Mr. Steinholt sat for two separate depositions. His opinions and his services in these proceedings contributed materially to the benefits achieved for the Class. (ii) M. Todd Henderson: $109,000.00. Lead Plaintiff retained the services of University of Chicago Law Professor M. Todd Henderson, an expert on the use of Rule 10b5-1 trading plans. In his reports, Professor Henderson offered opinions about Defendants’ insider trading and how that trading was influenced by Defendants’ Rule 10b5-1 trading plans. Professor Henderson reviewed thousands of pages of documents, met with Lead Counsel several times (both in person and by telephone) to discuss his opinions, and provided testimony during a one day-long - 3 - Case 1:17-cv-05753-JGK Document 188 Filed 08/10/21 Page 5 of 9 deposition. Professor Henderson’s opinions and his services in these proceedings contributed materially to the benefits achieved for the Class. (iii) Heights Consulting, LLC: $173,250.00. Lead Plaintiff retained the services of Heights Consulting, a business consulting firm, and its Principal Kevin Hill, to assist counsel in assessing the Business Intelligence industry and how the internal evidence produced in the Litigation reflected on Tableau’s position in that market both before and during the Class Period. Mr. Hill analyzed thousands of documents to understand the market for Tableau’s products and Tableau’s relative position in that market compared to its competitors. Mr. Hill’s opinions addressed issues that Lead Plaintiff intended to prove at trial, including falsity, scienter, and materiality. During the Litigation, Mr. Hill provided substantive testimony during a one day-long deposition. Mr. Hill’s services in these proceedings contributed materially to the benefits achieved for the Class. (iv) FitforProjects, Inc.: $24,750.00. Lead Plaintiff retained the services of FitforProjects, a data analysis firm, to assist its expert Kevin Hill in understanding volumes of data relating to the demand for Tableau’s products. Its analysis enabled Mr. Hill to develop his opinions concerning Tableau’s position in the Business Intelligence market and how the product offering by other companies in that market affected Tableau’s ability to close deals and generate revenue compared to Tableau’s performance historically. These services were necessary for Mr. Hill to understand the data and develop his opinions, which contributed materially to the benefits achieved for the Class. (v) The Expert Institute Group, LLC: $3,000.00. Lead Counsel utilized the services of The Expert Institute to identify, verify, and retain the services of Kevin Hill, a Business and Market Intelligence expert, to assist in analyzing and understanding the market for - 4 - Case 1:17-cv-05753-JGK Document 188 Filed 08/10/21 Page 6 of 9 Tableau’s products before and during the Class Period and Tableau’s relative position in that market compared to its competitors. (f) Photocopies: $3,665.99. In connection with this case, the Firm made 15,492 black and white copies. Robbins Geller requests $0.15 per copy for a total of $2,323.80. Each time an in-house copy machine is used, our billing system requires that a case or administrative billing code be entered and that is how the number of in-house copies were identified as related to the Litigation. The Firm also paid $1,342.19 to outside copy vendors. A breakdown of these outside charges by date and vendor is set forth in the attached Exhibit F. (g) Online Legal and Financial Research: $21,282.90. This category includes vendors such as LexisNexis Products, Refinitiv (formerly Thomson Financial), Transunion Risk and Alternative Data Solutions, and Westlaw. These resources were used to obtain access to SEC filings, factual databases, legal research and for cite-checking of briefs. This expense represents the expenses incurred by Robbins Geller for use of these services in connection with this Litigation.