1 LERACH COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP 2 JEFFREY W. LAWRENCE ( 166806) BING Z. RYAN (228641 ) 3 100 Pine Street, Suite 2600 San Francisco, CA 94111 4 Telephone : 415/288-4545 415/288-4534 (fax) 5 [email protected] [email protected] 6 - and - WILLIAM S. LERACH (68581) 7 JEFFREY D . LIGHT (159515) BRIAN O . O'MARA (229737) FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD 8 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 WILLIAM B . FEDERMAN San Diego, CA 9210 1 120 N. Robinson, Suite 2720 9 Telephone : 619/231-1058 Oklahoma City, OK 73102 619/231-7423 (fax) Telephone: 405/235-1560 1 0 [email protected] 405/239-2112 (fax) [email protected] wfederman@aol .com 11 bomara@lerachlaw .com 12 Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNI A 15 SAN JOSE DIVISION 16 In re THORATEC CORP . SECURITIES Master File No. 5 :04-cv-03168-RMW LITIGATION 17 CLASS ACTION 18 This Document Relates To : NOTICE OF MOTION AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND 19 ALL ACTIONS . AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF LEAD COUNSEL'S MOTION FOR AN AWARD 20 OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSE S 21 DATE: November 17, 2006 22 TIME: 9 :00 a.m. COURTROOM : The Honorable 23 Ronald M. Whyte 24 25 26 27 28 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 Page 3 1. INTRODUCTION . ..... .. .. .. .... .1 4 II. AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES . .. .. ..... .. .. .. .... .4 5 A. The Legal Standards Governing the Award of Attorneys' Fees in Common Fund Cases Supports the Requested Award .... .. .. .. ...... 4 6 1 . A Reasonable Percentage of the Fund Recovered Is th e 7 Appropriate Approach to Awarding A ttorneys' Fees in Commo n Fund Cases . .. ....... .. .. ...... .. 4 8 2. A Percentage Fee of 25% of the Fund Created Is Reasonable i n 9 This Case . .. .. .. .. ..... .. .. ........ .6 10 B. Factors Considered by Courts in the Ninth Circuit in Determining Fe e Awards Support the Requested Award. .. .. ... .. .. ...... .7 11 1 . The Results Achieved . .. .. ....... .. .. .. .. ...... .7 12 2. The Risks of Litigation . .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. .. ...... 7 13 3 . The Skill Required and the Quality of Representation . .. .. .. .... .9 14 4. The Contingent Nature of the Fee and the Financial Burde n 15 Carried by Lead Counsel . .. .. .. .. ....... .. .. .. .....10 16 5 . Awards in Similar Cases . .. .. .. .. ....... .. .. .. .....12 17 6. The Reaction of the Class Supports the Fee Request . .. .. ..... 13 18 III. LEAD COUNSEL ARE ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT FOR THEI R REASONABLE LITIGATION EXPENSES . .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. .. .....13 19 IV . CONCLUSION . .. .. ....... .. .. .. .....1 5 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NOTICE OF MOTION AND POINTS & AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' - i - FEES AND EXPENSES - 5 :04-cv-03168-RMW 1 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES 2 Page 3 Anixter v. Home-Stake Prod. Co. , 77 F .3d 1215 (10th Cir . 1996) .. .. .. .. ...... .......... .. .. .. ....... .. .. .. .. .....11 4 Backman v. Polaroid Corp. , 5 910 F .2d 10 (1st Cir. 1990) . .. ...... .. .. .... ....... ..... ........... .. .. .. .....11 6 Berkey Photo, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co. , 603 F .2d 263 (2d Cir . 1979) . .. ..................... .............. .. .. .. .. .. .....11 7 Blum v. Stenson, 8 465 U .S. 886, 104 S . Ct. 1541, 79 L. Ed. 2d 891 (1984). .. .. .. .........4 9 Boeing Co. v. Van Gemert, 444 U.S. 472, 100 S . Ct. 745, 62 L. Ed. 2d 676 (1980). .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .......... .4 10 Broderick v. Pricewaterhouse Coopers LLP , 11 169 Fed. Appx . 496 (9th Cir . 2006) .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .12 12 Camden I Condo. Assn v. Dunkle, 946 F.2d 768 (11th Cir . 1991) . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. 5 13 Churchill Vill. L.L.C. v. GE, 14 361 F.3d 566 (9th Cir . 2004) ..... .. ...... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...... .. .. 8 15 Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms. , 509 U .S. 579, 113 S . Ct. 2786, 125 L . Ed. 2d 469 (1993). .. .. .. .. .. ........ .9 16 Florin v. Nationsbank, N.A. , 17 34 F.3d 560 (7th Cir . 1994) . .......... ......... .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. ....... 5 18 Genna v. Digital Link Corporation , No. C-96-20867-RMW (EAI) (N .D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2000) . .. .......6 19 Goldstein v. MCI Worldcom, 20 340 F.3d 238 (5th Cir . 2003) .. ...... ................. .............. .. .. .. .. ....... 8 21 Gompper v. VISX, Inc. , 298 F .3d 893 (9th Cir. 2002) . .. .. .. .. .. ............................. .. .. .. .. .....12 22 Gottlieb v. Barry, 23 43 F .3d 474 (10th Cir. 1994) . .. .. .. .. .. .. .......... .. .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. .......5 24 Harris v. Marhoefer, 24 F .3d 16 (9th Cir. 1994) . .. .. .. .. .. .. ...... .. .. .. .. ........... .. .. .. ...13 25 Hensley v. Eckerhart , 26 461 U.S. 424, 103 S . Ct. 1933, 76 L. Ed. 2d 40 (1983)......... .. .. ...7 27 In re Activision Sec . Litig. , 723 F . Supp. 1373 (N.D . Cal. 1989) . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. 6 28 NOTICE OF MOTION AND POINTS & AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' - 1i - FEES AND EXPENSES - 5 :04-cv-03168-RMW 1 2 Page 3 In re Alza Sec . Litig. , No. C-93-20290-RMW (PVT)(N .D. Cal. Jan. 27, 1995) . .. .. ....... 6 4 In re Apple Computer Sec. Litig. , 5 No. C-84-20148-(A)-JW, 1991 U .S. Dist. LEXIS 15608 (N.D . Cal. Sept. 6, 1991) ....... .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .11 6 In re Clarent Corp. Sec. Litig. , 7 No. C 01-03361 CRB (JCS), slip op . at 2 (N.D. Cal . Apr. 18, 2005) . 12 8 In re Equity Funding Corp. of Am. Sec. Litig. , 438 F . Supp . 1303 (C .D. Cal. 1977) . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ....... .. .. .10 9 In re GMC Pick- Up Truck Fuel Tank Prods. Liab. Litig. , 10 55 F .3d 768 (3d Cir . 1995) .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. .5 11 In re Heritage Bond Litig. , No . 02-ML-1475-DT (RCX), 2005 WL 159438 9 12 (C.D . Cal. June 10, 2005) .. .. .... .......... .... ...... .. .. .. .. ........... .. .. 7,9 13 In re Ikon Office Solutions, Inc. Sec. Litig. , 194 F .R.D. 166 (E.D. Pa. 2000) . .. ......... .............................. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...9 . 14 In re King Res . Co. Sec. Litig. , 15 420 F . Supp. 610 (D. Colo. 1976) . .. ....... .. .. .. .................... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... 8 16 In re Prudential-Bache Energy Income P'ships Sec. Litig. , No. 888, 1994 WL 202394 (E .D. La. May 18, 1994) .............. .. .. .. .. .. .9, 11, 13 17 In re Read-Rite Corp. Sec. Litig. , 18 335 F.3d 843 (9th Cir. 2003) . .. ......... .. .. .. ...... .............. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .12 19 In re Rite Aid Corp. Sec. Litig. , 396 F.3d 294 (3d Cir. 2005) . .. ....... .. .. ............................ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...3 20 In re Sumitomo Copper Litig. , 21 74 F. Supp. 2d 393 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) . .. .......... .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ......... .. .12 22 In re Thirteen Appeals Arising out of the San Juan Dupont Plaza Hotel Fire Litig. , 56 F.3d 295 (1st Cir. 1995). .. .......... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ......... .. .. ...5 23 In re Wash. Pub. Power Supply Sys. Sec. Litig. , 24 19 F.3d 1291 (9th Cir. 1994) . .. .. ........ .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........... .. .. .. .passim 25 Johnston v. Comerica Mortgage Corp. , 83 F.3d 241 (8th Cir. 1996) . .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ......... ..