Opinion
C 19-07918 WHA
01-27-2023
ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL
WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The parties move for preliminary approval of their class action settlement. At the hearing on the motion, the Court identified deficiencies in the proposed settlement agreement and class notice (Dkt. No. 285). After the parties submitted an amended settlement agreement and class notice and renewed their request for preliminary approval, the Court determined that the parties had not addressed all of its concerns (Dkt. No. 289). Namely, they had not clarified for class members the scope of the settlement, adjusted ambiguous language on the parties' intent, ensured that class members received meaningful responses to inquiries regarding the settlement, and altered provisions to make language internally consistent throughout. The parties submitted another amended settlement agreement and class notice and renewed their request for preliminary approval. Although they meaningfully addressed the stated concerns, the Court explained that certain deficiencies remained (Dkt. No. 291). Now the parties have submitted a further amended settlement agreement and class notice and renewed their request for preliminary approval once more.
“[P]reliminary approval of a settlement is appropriate if the proposed settlement appears to be the product of serious, informed, non-collusive negotiations, has no obvious deficiencies, does not improperly grant preferential treatment to class representatives or segments of the class, and falls within the range of possible approval.” Haralson v. U.S. Aviation Servs. Corp., 383 F.Supp.3d 959, 966 (N.D. Cal. 2019) (Judge Jon S. Tigar) (internal quotation and citation omitted). The Court has determined that there are no longer obvious deficiencies in the settlement agreement and class notice. Accordingly, this order GRANTS preliminary approval of the settlement. The fairness hearing remains scheduled for JULY 12, 2023, at 8:00 A.M.
IT IS SO ORDERED.