Mason V. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-Cv-3056-GPC-KSC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26 Filed 08/14/13 Page 1 of 3 1 LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON, APLC RONALD A. MARRON (175650) 2 [email protected] 3 SKYE RESENDES (278511) [email protected] 4 ALEXIS M. WOOD (270200) 5 [email protected] 6 651 Arroyo Drive San Diego, California 92103 7 Telephone: (619) 696-9006 8 Facsimile: (619) 564-6665 Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class 9 10 [Additional counsel listed on signature page] 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 ROBERT A. MASON, individually and Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC 14 on behalf of all others similarly situated Class Action 15 and the general public, NOTICE OF JOINT MOTION AND JOINT 16 Plaintiff, MOTION FOR AN ORDER (1) GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS 17 ACTION SETTLEMENT, (2) CERTIFYING 18 SETTLEMENT CLASS, (3) APPOINTING v. CLASS REPRESENTATIVE AND CLASS 19 COUNSEL, (4) APPROVING NOTICE PLAN, AND (5) SETTING FINAL 20 HEEL, INC., a New Mexico APPROVAL HEARING, INCLUDING 21 Corporation, [FILED CONCURRENTLY WITH 22 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND 23 AUTHORITIES, DECLARATIONS OF Defendant. RONALD A. MARRON, MATTHEW G. 24 BALL, AND CHRISTIAN GRIMM, AND PROPOSED ORDER] 25 26 Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel Courtroom: 2D 27 Date: November 1, 2013 28 Time: 1:30 p.m. 29 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC JOINT EX PARTE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26 Filed 08/14/13 Page 2 of 3 1 TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 2 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to CivLR 7.2 and Federal Rule of Civil 3 Procedure 23(e), on November 1, 2013 at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 2D of this Court before 4 the Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel, or as soon thereafter as may be heard, Plaintiff Robert A. 5 Mason and Defendant Heel, Inc. jointly will and hereby do move for an order: (1) Granting 6 Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement; (2) Certifying a Settlement Class; 7 (3) Appointing Plaintiff Class Representative and Plaintiff’s Attorney as Class Counsel; 8 (4) Approving the Notice Plan; and (5) Setting the Final Approval Hearing and Schedule. 9 This joint motion is based on this Notice of Motion and Motion; the Memorandum of 10 Points and Authorities, and Declarations of Ronald A. Marron, Matthew G. Ball and 11 Christian Grimm filed concurrently herewith; the record on file and all proceedings had in 12 this matter to date; and all further evidence and argument submitted in support of or against 13 the motion. 14 Dated: August 14, 2013 Respectfully Submitted,* 15 /s/ Ronald A. Marron 16 RONALD A. MARRON [email protected] 17 LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. 18 MARRON, APLC SKYE RESENDES 19 ALEXIS M. WOOD 20 651 Arroyo Drive San Diego, CA 92103 21 Telephone: (619) 696-9006 22 Facsimile: (619) 564-6665 23 Counsel for Plaintiff and the 24 Proposed Class 25 /s Matthew G. Ball 26 Matthew G. Ball 27 [email protected] K&L GATES LLP 28 4 Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200 29 1 No. 12-cv-3056 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26 Filed 08/14/13 Page 3 of 3 1 San Francisco, CA 94111 Phone: +1.415.249.1014 2 Fax: +1.415.882.8220 3 Attorneys for Defendant 4 5 * Counsel for Plaintiff, Ronald A. Marron, certifies that, pursuant to Section 2.f.4. of the 6 Court’s CM/ECF Administrative Policies, Defendant’s counsel, Matthew G. Ball, has reviewed the contents of this Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement and 7 authorized placement of his electronic signature on this document. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 2 No. 12-cv-3056 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 1 of 33 1 LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON, APLC RONALD A. MARRON (175650) 2 [email protected] 3 SKYE RESENDES (278511) [email protected] 4 ALEXIS M. WOOD (270200) 5 [email protected] 6 651 Arroyo Drive San Diego, California 92103 7 Telephone: (619) 696-9006 8 Facsimile: (619) 564-6665 Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class 9 10 [Additional counsel listed on signature page] 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 ROBERT A. MASON, individually and Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC 14 on behalf of all others similarly situated Class Action 15 and the general public, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND 16 Plaintiff, AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF JOINT MOTION FOR AN ORDER (1) GRANTING 17 PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS 18 ACTION SETTLEMENT, (2) CERTIFYING v. SETTLEMENT CLASS, (3) APPOINTING 19 CLASS REPRESENTATIVE AND CLASS COUNSEL, (4) APPROVING NOTICE 20 HEEL, INC., a New Mexico PLAN, AND (5) SETTING FINAL 21 Corporation, APPROVAL HEARING, INCLUDING 22 [FILED CONCURRENTLY WITH 23 DECLARATIONS OF RONALD A. Defendant. MARRON, MATTHEW G. BALL, 24 CHRISTIAN GRIMM AND PROPOSED ORDER] 25 26 Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel Courtroom: 2D 27 Date: November 1, 2013 28 Time: 1:30 p.m. 29 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC JOINT EX PARTE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 2 of 33 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 3 I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ........................................... 1 4 II. SUMMARY OF THE SETTLEMENT .................................................................. 5 5 A. Injunctive Relief ........................................................................................... 5 6 B. Monetary Relief ............................................................................................ 7 C. Costs of Notice and Administration, Attorneys’ Fees, 7 and Incentive Awards ................................................................................... 8 8 III. THE SETTLEMENT SATISFIES THE CRITERIA FOR 9 PRELIMINARY APPROVAL ............................................................................... 8 10 A. Standard of Review ......................................................................................8 11 B. The Court Should Certify the Class for Settlement Purposes .................... 10 12 1. Numerosity ............................................................................................ 10 13 2. Commonality ......................................................................................... 11 14 3. Typicality .............................................................................................. 12 15 4. Adequacy of Representation ................................................................. 12 16 5. The Proposed Class Meets the Requirements of Rule 23(b)(2)............ 14 17 6. The Proposed Class Meets the Requirements of Rule 23(b)(3)............ 15 18 C. The Court Should Grant Preliminary Approval of the Proposed Settlement ......................................................................... 17 19 1. The Settlement was Reached at Arm’s Length ..................................... 17 20 2. The Settlement has no Obvious Deficiencies and 21 Does Not Improperly Grant Preferential Treatment 22 to the Class Representative or Segments of the Class .......................... 18 23 3. The Proposed Settlement Falls is Fair, Reasonable and Adequate ....... 18 24 a. The Strength of Plaintiff’s Case ....................................................... 19 25 b. Complexity, Expense, and Probable Length of Litigation .............. 20 26 c. The Risk of Maintaining Class Action Status Throughout Trial ..... 20 27 d. Amount of Recovery ........................................................................ 20 28 e. The Extent of Discovery Completed and the Stage of the Proceedings ...................................................................................... 21 29 i Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 3 of 33 1 f. The Experience and Views of Counsel ............................................ 22 2 g. The Reaction of the Class Members to the Proposed Settlement .... 22 D. The Proposed Form of Class Notice and Notice Plan 3 Satisfy the Requirements of Rule 23 .......................................................... 23 4 E. The Proposed Timeline for Events Should Be Adopted ............................ 25 5 IV. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 25 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ii Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 4 of 33 1 TABLE OF AUTHORITY 2 CASES 3 Adams v. Inter-Con Sec. Sys., Inc., No. C-06-5428 MHP, 2007 WL 3225466 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2007) ........................ 17 4 Allison v. Citgo Petroleum Corp., 5 151 F.3d 402 (5th Cir. 1998) ...................................................................................... 14 6 Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591, 117 S. Ct. 2231 (1997) ........................................................................... 9 7 Boyd v. Bechtel Corp., 8 485 F. Supp. 610 (N.D. Cal. 1979) ............................................................................. 23 9 City P’ship Co. v. Jones Intercable, Inc. , 10 213 F.R.D. 576 (D. Colo. 2002) ................................................................................... 9 11 Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 133 S.Ct. 1426 (2013) ................................................................................................. 11 12 Cotton v. Hinton, 13 559 F.2d 1326 (5th Cir. 1977) ...................................................................................