CASE 0:11-cv-02559-JRT-JSM Document 41 Filed 07/03/12 Page 1 of 35 JAY EDELSON (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) ([email protected]) RAFEY S. BALABANIAN (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) ([email protected]) ARI J. SCHARG (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) ([email protected]) CHANDLER R. GIVENS (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) ([email protected]) EDELSON MCGUIRE LLC 350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1300 Chicago, Illinois 60654 Telephone: (312) 589-6370 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA BASEEM MISSAGHI, individually and ) Case No. 11-cv-02559-JRT-JSM on behalf of all others similarly situated, ) ) Plaintiff, ) PLAINTIFF BASEEM MISSAGHI’S ) MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF HIS v. ) MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY ) APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION BLOCKBUSTER L.L.C., a Delaware ) SETTLEMENT corporation, ) ) [Hon. John R. Tunheim] Defendant. ) ) ) CASE 0:11-cv-02559-JRT-JSM Document 41 Filed 07/03/12 Page 2 of 35 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 I. NATURE OF THE LITIGATION ........................................................................ 2 A. The Parties and Events Preceding Litigation .................................................. 2 B. Relevant Provisions of the VPPA ..................................................................... 3 C. Litigation, Mediation, and Settlement ............................................................. 4 D. Defendant’s Position ......................................................................................... 5 II. SETTLEMENT TERMS ........................................................................................ 6 A. Settlement Class Definition .............................................................................. 6 B. Injunctive Relief for the Benefit of the Settlement Class ............................... 6 C. Other Relief ........................................................................................................ 8 D. Release ................................................................................................................ 8 III. THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT CLASS SHOULD BE CERTIFIED ......... 9 A. The Requirement of Numerosity is Satisfied ................................................ 10 B. The Requirement of Commonality is Satisfied ............................................. 10 C. The Typicality Requirement is Satisfied ....................................................... 11 D. The Adequate Representation Requirement is Satisfied ............................. 12 E. The Proposed Settlement Class Meets the Requirements of Rule 23(b)(2) .................................................................................................... 14 F. Notice to the Class ........................................................................................... 16 V. THE COURT SHOULD APPOINT PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL AS CLASS COUNSEL ............................................................................................................. 16 VI. THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT WARRANTS PRELIMINARY ii CASE 0:11-cv-02559-JRT-JSM Document 41 Filed 07/03/12 Page 3 of 35 APPROVAL ........................................................................................................... 18 A. The Strength of Plaintiff’s Case ..................................................................... 19 B. Blockbuster’s Financial Position ................................................................... 22 C. The Risk of Further Litigation ....................................................................... 23 D. The Settlement Relief ...................................................................................... 24 E. The Experience and Views of Counsel .......................................................... 25 F. The Stage of the Proceedings, Class Counsel’s Investigation, and the Informal Discovery Conducted to Date Support Approval of the Settlement ........................................................................................................ 26 G. The Settlement Resulted From Arms’ Length Negotiations Presided Over by a Well-Respected Mediator, Ensuring the Absence of Collusion .......... 27 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................ 27 iii CASE 0:11-cv-02559-JRT-JSM Document 41 Filed 07/03/12 Page 4 of 35 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT Amchem Prods. Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997) ........................................................ 9 Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay, 437 U.S. 463 (1978) ........................................................ 10 Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 U.S. 156 (1974). ........................................................... 9 Sorrell v. IMS Health, Inc., 131 S. Ct. 2653 (2011) ........................................................... 22 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S.Ct. 2541 (2011) ......................................... 10, 11, 15 UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS Adamson v. Bowen, 855 F.2d 668 (10th Cir. 1988) ........................................................... 14 Avritt v. Reliastar Life Ins. Co., 615 F.3d 1023 (8th Cir. 2010) ......................................... 14 DeBoer v. Mellon Mortg. Co., 64 F.3d 1171 (8th Cir. 1995) ............................................. 12 Grunin v. Int’l House of Pancakes, 513 F.2d 114 (8th Cir. 1975) ............................... 19, 23 In re St. Jude Med., Inc., 425 F.3d 1116 (8th Cir. 2005) .................................................... 14 In re Wireless Tel. Fed. Cost Recovery Fees Litig., 396 F.3d 922 (8th Cir. 2005) ............. 19 Little Rock Sch. Dist. V. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist., 921 F.2d 1371 (8th Cir. 1990) ................................................................................... 23 Paxton v. Union Nat. Bank, 668 F.2d 552 (8th Cir. 1982) ........................................... 14, 15 Sperry Rand Corp. v. Larson, 554 F.2d 868 (8th Cir. 1977) ............................................. 16 Sterk v. Redbox Automated Retail, LLC, 672 F.3d 535 (7th Cir. 2012) ............................. 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT CASES Alberts v. Nash Finch Co., 245 F.R.D. 399 (D. Minn. 2007) ............................................ 10 Armstrong v. Board of Sch. Dirs. Of Milwaukee, 616 F.2d 305 (7th Cir. 1980) ................ 25 iv CASE 0:11-cv-02559-JRT-JSM Document 41 Filed 07/03/12 Page 5 of 35 Holden v. Burlington Northern, Inc., 665 F.Supp. 1398 (D. Minn. 1987) ................... 25, 26 In re Baycol Products Litig., 218 F.R.D. 197 (D. Minn. 2003) ................................... 11, 12 In re Control Data Corp. Sec. Litig., 116 F.R.D. 216 (D. Minn. 1986). ........................... 12 In re Employee Ben. Plans Sec. Litig., CIV. 3-92-708, 1993 WL 330595 (D. Minn. June 2, 1993) ............................................................................................ 27 In re Facebook Privacy Litigation, (10-cv-02389-JW) (N.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2010) ........... 17 In re GenesisIntermedia, Inc. Sec. Litig., 232 F.R.D. 321 (D. Minn. 2005) ...................... 10 In re Netflix Privacy Litigation, (11-cv-00370-EJD) (N.D. Cal. Aug. 12, 2011) .............. 17 In re UnitedHealth Group Inc. S’holder Derivative Litig., 631 F. Supp. 2d 1151 (D. Minn. 2009) ......................................................................................................... 19 Kimball v. Frederick J. Hanna & Associates, P.C., CIV-10130MJDJJG, 2011 WL 3610129 (D. Minn. Aug. 15, 2011) ........................... 13 Lockwood Motors, Inc. v. Gen. Motors Corp., 162 F.R.D. 569 (D. Minn. 1995) .............. 12 Nerland v. Caribou Coffee Co., Inc., 564 F. Supp. 2d 1010 (D. Minn. 2007) ................... 10 Ngqanyia v. Ashcroft, CIV-02-502(RHK/AJB), 2003 WL 131733 (D. Minn. Jan. 14, 2003) ............................................................................................. 16 Rodriguez v. Sony Computer Entm’t Am., LLC, No. 4:11-cv-04084 (N.D. Cal. 2011) ...... 13 Sterk v. Best Buy Stores, et. al., No. 1:11-cv-01894 (N.D. Ill. 2011) ................................. 13 Sterk v. Redbox Automated Retail, LLC, 806 F. Supp. 2d 1059 (N.D. Ill. 2011) ............... 21 Sterk v. Redbox Automated Retail, LLC, No. 1:11-cv-01729, 2012 WL 1419071 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 24, 2012) ........................................................................................ 13, 21 Thompson v. Am. Tobacco Co., Inc., 189 F.R.D. 544 (D. Minn. 1999) ............................. 14 Wagner v. Family Video Movie Club, Inc., No. 1:11-cv-05671 (N.D. Ill. 2011) ............... 13 Welsch v. Gardebring, 667 F. Supp. 1284 (D. Minn. 1987) ......................................... 18, 19 v CASE 0:11-cv-02559-JRT-JSM Document 41 Filed 07/03/12 Page 6 of 35 Zilhaver v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., 646 F. Supp. 2d 1075 (D. Minn. 2009) ..... 18, 19, 23 STATUTES 18 U.S.C. §§ 2710, et seq ........................................................................................... passim Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 ........................................................................................................ passim MISCELLANEOUS 7A FED. PRAC. & PROC. CIV. § 1775 (2d ed. 1986) ........................................................... 14 Conte & Newberg, 4 Newberg on Class Actions (4th ed. 2002) ....................................... 27 MANUAL FOR COMPLEX LITIGATION (4th ed. 2004) ............................................................ 9 vi CASE 0:11-cv-02559-JRT-JSM