1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Case 3:17-md-02801-JD Document 414 Filed 12/18/18 Page 1 of 26 1 Joseph R. Saveri (State Bar No. 130064) Steven N. Williams (State Bar No. 175489) 2 Joshua P. Davis (State Bar No. 193254) Nicomedes S. Herrera (State Bar No. 275332) 3 Demetrius X. Lambrinos (State Bar No. 246027) James G. Dallal (State Bar No. 277826) 4 V Chai Oliver Prentice (State Bar No. 309807) JOSEPH SAVERI LAW FIRM, INC. 5 601 California Street, Suite 1000 San Francisco, California 94108 6 Telephone: (415) 500-6800 Facsimile: (415) 395-9940 7 Email: [email protected] [email protected] 8 [email protected] [email protected] 9 [email protected] [email protected] 10 Class Counsel for Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs 11 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 15 IN RE CAPACITORS ANTITRUST LITIGATION Master File No. 3:17-md-02801-JD Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-03264-JD 16 THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ALL DIRECT PURCHASER ACTIONS DIRECT PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS’ 17 MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION 18 SETTLEMENT WITH DEFENDANTS NICHICON AND 19 RUBYCON 20 Date: January 24, 2019 21 Time: 3:00 p.m. Courtroom: 11, 19th Floor 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 Master File No. 3-17-md-02801-JD Case No. 3:14-cv-03264-JD 31 DPPS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENTS 32 Case 3:17-md-02801-JD Document 414 Filed 12/18/18 Page 2 of 26 1 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION 2 3 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD: 4 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that at 3:00 p.m. on January 24, 2019, at the United States District 5 Court for the Northern District of California located at 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 6 94104, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs (“DPPs”) will and 7 hereby do move the Court for an order granting preliminary approval of DPPs’ class action settlements 8 with defendants Nichicon Corporation and Nichicon (America) Corporation (together, “Nichicon”); 9 and Rubycon Corporation and Rubycon America Inc. (together, “Rubycon”) (Nichicon and Rubycon 10 collectively, the “Settling Defendants”) in partial settlement of this class action lawsuit. 11 DPPs’ motion is based on this Notice of Motion, the accompanying Memorandum of Points and 12 Authorities, the Declaration of Joseph R. Saveri and the exhibits attached thereto, the Declaration of 13 Kendall S. Zylstra and the exhibits attached thereto, the Court’s files and records in this matter, oral 14 argument of counsel, and such other and further matters as the Court may consider. 15 16 Dated: December 18, 2018 Respectfully Submitted, JOSEPH SAVERI LAW FIRM, INC. 17 18 By: /s/ Joseph R. Saveri 19 Joseph R. Saveri 20 Joseph R. Saveri (State Bar No. 130064) Steven N. Williams (State Bar No. 175489 21 Joshua P. Davis (State Bar No. 193254) Nicomedes S. Herrera (State Bar No. 275332) 22 Demetrius X. Lambrinos (State Bar No. 246027) James G. Dallal (State Bar No. 277826) 23 V Chai Oliver Prentice (State Bar No. 309807) JOSEPH SAVERI LAW FIRM, INC. 24 601 California Street, Suite 1000 San Francisco, California 94108 25 Telephone: (415) 500-6800 Facsimile: (415) 395-9940 26 Class Counsel for Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs 27 28 30 Master File No. 3-17-md-02801-JD Case No. 3:14-cv-03264-JD i 31 DPPS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENTS 32 Case 3:17-md-02801-JD Document 414 Filed 12/18/18 Page 3 of 26 1 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 3 Page(s) 4 I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 5 II. CASE HISTORY AND SETTLING DEFENDANTS .................................................... 2 6 A. Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs’ Factual Allegations and Claims ................................. 2 7 B. Procedural History and Discovery ......................................................................... 2 8 C. Prior Settlement History ........................................................................................ 3 9 D. The Settling Defendants ........................................................................................ 3 10 1. Nichicon ..................................................................................................... 3 11 2. Rubycon ...................................................................................................... 4 12 III. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENTS ............................................................. 5 13 A. Settlement Consideration—$108 million cash, plus up to an additional $12 14 million in contingent payments based on Rubycon’s financial results through FY 2019. ....................................................................................................................... 5 15 1. Nichicon’s Settlement Consideration ........................................................ 5 16 2. Rubycon’s Settlement Consideration ......................................................... 5 17 B. The Settlement Class ............................................................................................. 6 18 C. Release of Claims against Settling Defendants ...................................................... 7 19 D. Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses ............................................................................... 7 20 IV. THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENTS SHOULD BE PRELIMINARILY APPROVED ... 8 21 A. Standards for Preliminary Approval of a Proposed Settlement ............................. 8 22 B. The Proposed Settlements Are Procedurally Sound and Presumptively Fair........ 9 23 C. The Proposed Settlements Are within the Range of Reasonableness .................... 9 24 V. THE THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTIFICATION OF A 25 SETTLEMENT CLASS ARE MET .............................................................................. 11 26 VI. THE PROPOSED NOTICE TO THE SETTLEMENT CLASS—IDENTICAL TO THE NOTICE PLANS FOR THE PRIOR SETTLEMENTS—SHOULD BE 27 APPROVED ..................................................................................................................... 12 28 A. Summary of Notice Plan ...................................................................................... 13 30 Master File No. 3-17-md-02801-JD Case No. 3:14-cv-03264-JD ii 31 DPPS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENTS 32 Case 3:17-md-02801-JD Document 414 Filed 12/18/18 Page 4 of 26 1 1. Notice and Claims Administrator ............................................................ 13 2 2. Settlement Website .................................................................................. 13 3 3. Direct Notice—Long Form Notice .......................................................... 13 4 4. Publication of Notice ................................................................................ 14 5 B. The Notice Forms and Dissemination Plan Meet All Requirements ................... 14 6 VII. DISTRIBUTION AND USE OF SETTLEMENT FUNDS ......................................... 15 7 A. Distribution of Funds to Settlement Class Members ........................................... 15 8 B. Payment of Claims Administration Expenses ...................................................... 16 9 VIII. THE FINAL APPROVAL HEARING SHOULD BE SCHEDULED ........................... 16 10 IX. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 Master File No. 3-17-md-02801-JD Case No. 3:14-cv-03264-JD iii 31 DPPS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENTS 32 Case 3:17-md-02801-JD Document 414 Filed 12/18/18 Page 5 of 26 1 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES 2 Page(s) 3 Cases 4 Class Plaintiffs v. City of Seattle, 955 F.2d 1268 (9th Cir. 1992) ................................................................. 9 5 Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp., 150 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 1998) ............................................................................. 9 6 In re Air Cargo Shipping Servs. Antitrust Litig., No. 06-md-1775, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7 108299 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 2, 2012) .......................................................................................................... 6 8 In re Auto. Parts Antitrust Litig., No. 12-md-02311, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98446 (E.D. 9 Mich. June 20, 2016) ............................................................................................................................ 8 10 In re Auto. Refinishing Paint Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1426, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29163 (E.D. Pa. May 10, 2004) .......................................................................................................... 10 11 In re Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1917, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89075 12 (N.D. Cal. June 8, 2017) ..................................................................................................................... 15 13 In re Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litig., No. 3:07-cv-5944, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24951 14 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 28, 2016) .................................................................................................................... 15 15 In re Cipro Cases I and II, J.C.C.P. Nos. 4154, 4220 (San Diego County Sup. Ct.) .................................. 13 16 In re Citric Acid Antitrust Litig., 145 F.Supp. 2d 1152 (N.D. Cal. 2001)................................................... 15 17 In Re Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM) Antitrust Litig., No. M-02-1486 PJH, 18 slip. op. (N.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2006) .....................................................................................................