Opinion
2:19-cv-02598-JWL-TJJ
09-19-2023
JESUS PEREZ On behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. BARRIER COMPLIANCE SERVICES, LLC, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER AND FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT
Hon. John W. Lungstum United States District Judge
This matter is before the Court on the parties' Joint Motion for Final Approval of Collective Action Settlement and Plaintiffs' Unopposed Renewed Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Doc. ## 154, 155). Having carefully considered the parties' submissions, and having conducted a Final Approval and Fairness Hearing on September 14, 2023, and for the reasons set forth herein and the reasons set forth by the Court on the record of the hearing, the Court grants the motions.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the parties' Joint Motion for Final Approval and Plaintiffs' Motion for Award of Attorney's Fees and Expenses are GRANTED.
1. The Court grants final approval of the parties' Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”), finding its terms fair, reasonable, and adequate, and directing consummation of its terms and provisions. The settlement was reached at arms'-length, by experienced counsel who believe that the settlement is fair, after the parties' second mediation before an experienced mediator. Moreover, the settlement amount is substantial, representing approximately 50 percent of plaintiffs' maximum damages. The fairness and adequacy of the settlement is further confirmed by the facts that 23 of the 26
remaining opt-in plaintiffs favored settlement on these terms, and that only two submitted objections. Those two objections did not address the particular terms of the settlement, and they are therefore overruled.
2. The Court finds that the settlement is a reasonable compromise of a bona fide dispute of the claims and defenses in this matter, and there is nothing in the record to suggest that the settlement would otherwise frustrate the purposes of the FLSA. As counsel for both sides confirmed, the case was hotly contested, came before the Court for resolution of various issues, and involved substantial questions of law and fact.
3. The Court awards distribution of Settlement Awards as defined in the Agreement to class members who have submitted valid claim forms (“Claimants”), as a fair compromise of contested claims that will provide these Claimants with adequate compensation for their claims in this case given the contested nature of the claims, complexity of issues involved, assurance of relief for all Claimants, and benefit of obtaining such relief in light of the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal, to be paid by Defendant.
4. The Court approves a Class Representative Service Award in the amount of $5,000.00 to Named Plaintiff Jesus Perez to be paid by Defendant in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. The Court finds this award to be reasonable and appropriate.
5. The Court approves an Incentive Award to Named Plaintiff Jesus Perez in the amount of $5,000.00 for his full release and settlement of claims against Defendant. The Court finds this award to be reasonable and appropriate.
6. The Court approves Class Counsel's application for an award of attorneys' fees in the amount of $225,000 to be paid by Defendant in accordance with the terms of the
Agreement. The Court finds such an award to be reasonable and appropriate. Experienced counsel obtained a good result for plaintiffs, and the amount falls far short of counsel's lodestar, based on a reasonable number of hours expended and reasonable rates, and thus the award results in a substantial discount from counsel's usual fees. Moreover, no plaintiff objected to the fee request.
7. The Court approves Class Counsel's reimbursement of $7,634.00 in litigation costs. The Court finds those costs to have been reasonably incurred.
8. The Court approves redistribution of any unclaimed settlement funds as set forth under the terms of the Agreement.
9. The Court permanently enjoins all Class Members as defined in the Agreement (other than Plaintiff Kory Knoles, who timely filed a request to be excluded from the settlement) from prosecuting against Defendant and the Released Parties, as defined in the Agreement, and any of the Class Members released claims as defended in the Agreement.
10. The Court enters judgment dismissing this litigation with prejudice in accordance with the terms of the Agreement.
IT IS SO ORDERED.