Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 1813-36 Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 83 EXHIBIT 36 Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 1813-36 Filed 05/26/17 Page 2 of 83 Daryl F. Scott 1 SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP 2 156 South Main Street P.O. Box 192 3 Colchester, CT 06415 Telephone: 860-537-5537 4 Facsimile: 860-537-4432 [email protected] 5 6 Counsel for Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs 7 8 9 10 11 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 OAKLAND DIVISION 15 16 IN RE: LITHIUM ION BATTERIES Case No. 4:13-MD-02420 YGR (DMR) ANTITRUST LITIGATION 17 MDL NO. 2420 18 DECLARATION OF DARYL F. SCOTT IN SUPPORT OF INDIRECT 19 PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ This Document Relates to: 20 FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES ON BEHALF OF ALL INDIRECT PURCHASER ACTIONS 21 SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DECLARATION OF DARYL F. SCOTT IN SUPPORT OF IPPS’ MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES ON BEHALF OF SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP Case No. 4:13-md-02420-YGR (DMR) Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 1813-36 Filed 05/26/17 Page 3 of 83 1 I, Daryl F. Scott declare: 2 1. I am a partner of Scott+Scott, Attorneys at Law, LLP (“Scott+Scott”), Counsel for 3 Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs (“IPPs” or “Plaintiffs”) in this action. I submit this declaration in 4 support of IPPs’ Motion for an Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Reimbursement of Expenses. I 5 make this declaration based on my personal knowledge and if called as a witness, I could and 6 would competently testify to the matters stated herein. 7 2. My firm is a member of Plaintiffs’ executive committee and has served as counsel 8 to Class representatives Linda Lincoln and Donna Shawn, and as counsel for IPPs throughout the 9 course of this litigation. My firm was counsel to certain other proposed Class representatives, 10 including Benjamin Kramer, Angela Turner, and Matthew Miller, who were dropped as named 11 Plaintiffs when the IPP Class definition was narrowed to only include claims based on purchases 12 of cylindrical lithium batteries. 13 3. The background and experience of Scott+Scott and its attorneys are summarized in 14 the curriculum vitae attached hereto as Exhibit A. 15 4. Scott+Scott has prosecuted this litigation solely on a contingent-fee basis, and has 16 been at risk that it would not receive any compensation for prosecuting claims against the 17 Defendants. While Scott+Scott devoted its time and resources to this matter, it has foregone other 18 legal work for which it would have been compensated. 19 5. During the pendency of the litigation, Scott+Scott performed the following work: 20 (i) conferring with Class representatives and keeping them apprised of the status of the litigation; 21 (ii) working with several Class representatives in responding to requests for production of 22 documents and interrogatories; (iii) working with Class representatives to collect and produce 23 responsive discovery documents to Defendants; (iv) preparing for and defending multiple Class 24 representative depositions; (v) conferring with Class representatives regarding the proposed 25 settlements; (vi) researching and drafting an opposition to one of the Defendants’ motions to 26 27 DECLARATION OF DARYL F. SCOTT IN SUPPORT OF IPPS’ MOTION FOR AN AWARD 28 OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES ON BEHALF OF SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP Case No. 4:13-md-02420-YGR (DMR) 1 Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 1813-36 Filed 05/26/17 Page 4 of 83 1 dismiss; (vii) reviewing documents produced by Defendants; and (viii) performing other tasks at 2 the direction of the co-lead counsel firms. 3 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a billing summary of Scott+Scott’s total hours and 4 lodestar, computed at current billing rates, from June 1, 2013, to February 28, 2017. Counsel for 5 Plaintiffs are not seeking attorneys’ fees for any time billed prior to the appointment of lead 6 counsel. See Order dated May 17, 2013 (ECF No. 194). The total number of hours spent by 7 Scott+Scott during this period of time was 1854.80, with a corresponding lodestar (based on 8 current rates) of $779,655. The lodestar amount reflected in Exhibit B is for work assigned by 9 Lead Counsel, and was performed by professional staff at my law firm. This summary was 10 prepared from contemporaneous, daily time records regularly prepared and maintained by 11 Scott+Scott. 12 7. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a list of the various billing rates each attorney and 13 staff member at my firm has billed at in this case. 14 8. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a compilation of my firm’s detailed records at 15 historical billing rates. The entries in Exhibit D have been redacted per the Court’s Order in ECF 16 No. 1803. 17 9. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a summary of the expenses Scott+Scott has 18 incurred during the course of this litigation. Scott+Scott expended a total of $67,679.53 in 19 unreimbursed costs and expenses in connection with the prosecution of this case. These expenses 20 were incurred on behalf of IPPs by Scott+Scott on a contingent basis and have not been 21 reimbursed. The expenses reflected in Exhibit E were prepared from expense vouchers, receipts, 22 and bank records, and thus represent an accurate recordation of the expenses incurred. 23 24 25 26 27 DECLARATION OF DARYL F. SCOTT IN SUPPORT OF IPPS’ MOTION FOR AN AWARD 28 OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES ON BEHALF OF SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP Case No. 4:13-md-02420-YGR (DMR) 2 Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 1813-36 Filed 05/26/17 Page 5 of 83 1 10. I have reviewed the time and expenses reported by Scott+Scott in this case which 2 are included in this declaration, and I affirm that they are true and accurate. 3 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is 4 true and correct. 5 Executed on Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at Colchester, Connecticut. 6 7 Daryl F. Scott 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 DECLARATION OF DARYL F. SCOTT IN SUPPORT OF IPPS’ MOTION FOR AN AWARD 28 OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES ON BEHALF OF SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP Case No. 4:13-md-02420-YGR (DMR) 3 Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 1813-36 Filed 05/26/17 Page 6 of 83 1 ATTESTATION 2 I, Steven N. Williams, hereby attest, pursuant to United States District Court, Northern 3 District of California Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), that concurrence to the filing of this document 4 has been obtained from the signatory hereto. 5 6 By: /s/ Steven N. Williams 7 Steven N. Williams 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 DECLARATION OF DARYL F. SCOTT IN SUPPORT OF IPPS’ MOTION FOR AN AWARD 28 OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES ON BEHALF OF SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP Case No. 4:13-md-02420-YGR (DMR) 4 Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 1813-36 Filed 05/26/17 Page 7 of 83 EXHIBIT A Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 1813-36 Filed 05/26/17 Page 8 of 83 SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP MISSION STATEMENT Scott+Scott, Attorneys at Law, LLP (“Scott+Scott”) is a nationally recognized law firm headquartered in Connecticut with offices in California, New York City, and Ohio. Scott+Scott represents individuals, businesses, public and private pension funds, and others who have suffered from corporate fraud and wrongdoing. Scott+Scott is directly responsible for recovering hundreds of millions of dollars and achieving substantial corporate governance reforms on behalf of its clients. Scott+Scott has significant expertise in complex antitrust, consumer, securities, ERISA, and civil rights litigation in both federal and state courts. Through its efforts, Scott+Scott promotes corporate social responsibility. ANTITRUST Scott+Scott litigates complex antitrust cases throughout the United States. Scott+Scott represents investors, business, and consumers in price-fixing, bid-rigging, monopolization, and other restraints of trade cases on both a class-wide and individual basis, helping to ensure that markets remain free, open, and competitive. With the opening of a London Office, Scott+Scott’s commitment to competition now includes pursuing its clients’ claims on a global basis. Scott+Scott’s class action antitrust practice includes serving as court-appointed lead counsel with the responsibility for the prosecution of class claims. Scott+Scott serves as court-appointed lead counsel in high-value antitrust class action cases, including Dahl v. Bain Capital Partners, LLC, No. 07-cv-12388 (D. Mass.) (challenging bid rigging and market allocation of leveraged buyouts by private equity firms resulting in $590.5 million in settlements)); In Re: Foreign Exchange Benchmark Rates Antitrust Litigation, No. 13-cv-7789 (S.D.N.Y.) (challenging price-fixing of foreign exchange rates (over $2 billion in partial settlements negotiated)); and Alaska Electrical Pension Fund v. Bank of America Corp., No. 14-cv-7126 (S.D.N.Y.) (challenging price-fixing of the ISDAfix benchmark interest rate).