Case 4:19-cv-06864-HSG Document 52 Filed 03/01/21 Page 1 of 27 1 John A. Yanchunis (pro hac vice) 2 [email protected] Morgan & Morgan Complex Litigation Group 3 201 North Franklin Street 7th Floor Tampa, Florida 33602 4 (813) 223-5505 (tel) 5 (813) 223-5402 (fax) 6 Joshua H. Watson CLAYEO C. ARNOLD, APC 7 865 Howe Ave 8 Sacramento, CA 95825 9 Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Putative Class 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 14 RYAN RICHARDS, RUBA AYOUB, CASE NO. 4:19-cv-06864 15 BRANDY TERBAY AND TRACY CUMMINGS, on behalf of themselves and all 16 others similarly situated, PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION 17 AND MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL Plaintiffs, OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT 18 vs. 19 CHIME FINANCIAL, INC., GALILEO 20 FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC., and THE BANCORP INC., 21 Defendants. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT CASE NO. 4:19-cv-06864 Case 4:19-cv-06864-HSG Document 52 Filed 03/01/21 Page 2 of 27 1 NOTICE OF MOTION 2 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE Plaintiffs Ryan Richards, Ruba Ayoub, Brandy Terbay, and Tracy 3 Cummings (“Plaintiffs”) will and hereby do respectfully move the Court for entry of an Order (1) 4 finally approving the Settlement Agreement; (2) certifying, for settlement purposes, the proposed 5 Settlement Class under Rule 23(a), (b)(3), and (e); (3) finding the class notice as implemented satisfied 6 Rule 23 and due process; (4) finally appointing Plaintiffs as Settlement Class Representatives; (5) 7 finally appointing as Lead Counsel John A. Yanchunis of Morgan & Morgan Complex Litigation 8 Group, and as Class Counsel Patrick A. Barthle II of Morgan & Morgan Complex Litigation Group 9 and Joshua H. Watson of Clayeo C. Arnold, APC, each as counsel for the Settlement Class (“Class 10 Counsel”) under Rule 23(g); (6) finally appointing Epiq Class Action and Claims Solutions, Inc. 11 (“Epiq”) as the Settlement Administrator; (7) overruling the objection; and (8) any other relief the 12 Court deems just and proper. 13 Plaintiffs’ motion is based on this notice; the accompanying Memorandum of Points and 14 Authorities and all attachments thereto; the Proposed Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Class 15 Action Settlement; and all records, pleadings and papers filed in this Action. This Motion is unopposed 16 by Defendants. 17 18 DATED: March 1, 2021 Respectfully submitted, 19 /s/ John A. Yanchunis 20 MORGAN & MORGAN COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP 21 John A. Yanchunis 201 North Franklin Street 7th Floor 22 Tampa, Florida 33602 23 (813) 223-5505 (813) 223-5402 (fax) 24 25 Proposed Lead Counsel 26 27 28 i MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT CASE NO. 4:19-cv-06864 Case 4:19-cv-06864-HSG Document 52 Filed 03/01/21 Page 3 of 27 1 2 Contents 3 4 NOTICE OF MOTION ................................................................................................................................................................................ i 5 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES ............................................................................................................................. 1 I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1 6 II. BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1 7 III. THE SETTLEMENT .................................................................................................................................................................. 5 8 A. The Settlement Class ................................................................................................................................................... 5 9 B. Settlement Relief ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 10 1. Courtesy Payment and Transaction Credits ................................................................................................. 5 11 2. Additional Tiered Relief .............................................................................................................................. 6 12 C. Notice Implementation ................................................................................................................................................ 8 13 D. Claims Experience .................................................................................................................................................... 10 14 IV. ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................................................................................ 11 15 A. The Court Should Certify the Settlement Class ......................................................................................................... 11 16 B. The Settlement Merits Final Approval ...................................................................................................................... 11 17 1. Adequacy of Relief: Costs, Risks, and Delay ............................................................................................ 12 18 2. Adequacy of Relief: Proposed Method of Distributing Relief .................................................................. 15 19 3. Adequacy of Relief: Attorneys’ Fees........................................................................................................ 16 20 4. Rule 23(e)(3) Agreements and Equality of Treatment. .............................................................................. 16 21 C. The District’s Procedural Guidance .......................................................................................................................... 17 22 D. The Notice Plan Met the Requirements of Due Process ............................................................................................ 19 23 E. Final Appointment of Settlement Class Counsel ....................................................................................................... 20 24 F. Ninth Circuit Final Approval Factors ……………………………………………………………………………..20 25 1. The Presence of a Government Participant ................................................................................................ 21 26 2. The Reaction of the Class Members to the Settlement .............................................................................. 21 27 V. CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................................................................... 21 28 ii MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT CASE NO. 4:19-cv-06864 Case 4:19-cv-06864-HSG Document 52 Filed 03/01/21 Page 4 of 27 1 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES 2 Cases 3 Altamirano v. Shaw Indus., Inc., No. 13-CV-00939-HSG, 2015 WL 4512372, at *8 (N.D. Cal. July 24, 2015) ................................... 16 4 Chambers v. Whirlpool Corp., 214 F. Supp. 3d 877, 885-86 (C.D. Cal. 2016) ...................................................................................... 11 5 Fuentes v. UniRush, LLC, Final Approval Order, No. 1:15-cv-08372 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 12, 2016) ................................................... 10, 15 6 G. F. v. Contra Costa Cty., No. 13-CV-03667-MEJ, 2015 WL 4606078, at *14 (N.D. Cal. July 30, 2015) .......................................... 16 7 Hendricks v. Starkist Co., No. 13-cv-00729-HSG, 2016 WL 5462423, at *10 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 29, 2016) ............................................ 14 8 Hughes v. Microsoft Corp., No. 98-CV-01646, 2001 WL 34089697 ..................................................................................................... 10 9 In re Anthem, Inc. Data Breach Litig., 327 F.R.D. 299, 320–21 (N.D. Cal. 2018) ................................................................................... 9 10 In re Apollo Grp. Inc. Sec. Litig., No. 04-2147, 2012 WL 1378677, *4 (D. Ariz. 2012) ........................................................................ 11 11 In re Bluetooth Headset Prods. Liab. Litig., 654 F.3d 935, 946 (9th Cir. 2011) ..................................................................................... 21 12 In re Online DVD-Rental Antitrust Litig., 779 F.3d 934, 947 (9th Cir. 2015) ........................................................................................ 17 13 In re Sony Gaming Network & Customer Data Breach and Security Litig., 903 F. Supp. 2d 942, 963 (S.D. Cal. 2012) ....................... 13 14 Jones v. Commerce Bank, N.A., 2006 WL 2642153, *2 (S.D.N.Y 2006) ............................................................................................... 13 15 Ko v. Natura Pet Prods., Inc., No. C 09-02619 SBA, 2012 WL 3945541, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 10, 2012).......................................... 14 16 Kuhns v. Scottrade, 868 F.3d 711, 718 (8th Cir. 2017) ........................................................................................................................... 13 17 Lewis v. Green Dot Corporation, Case No. 2:16-cv-03557 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2017) .................................................................... 10, 15 18 Miller v. Bank of Am. N.T. & S.A., 2014 WL 5091897, *11 (Cal. Super. 2014) ..................................................................................... 13 19 Mullane v. Central