Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

James Rafton, Trustee of the James and Cynthia Rafton Trust, et al v. Rydex Series Funds; et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


February 9, 2012

JAMES RAFTON, TRUSTEE OF THE JAMES AND CYNTHIA RAFTON TRUST, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
RYDEX SERIES FUNDS; ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable Lucy H. Koh United States District Judge

ALAN W. SPARER (No. 104921) MARC HABER (No. 192981) JAMES S. NABWANGU (No. 236601) SPARER LAW GROUP 100 Pine Street, 33rd Floor San Francisco, California 94111-5128 4 Telephone: 415/217-7300 Facsimile: 415/217-7307 5 asparer@sparerlaw.com mhaber@sparerlaw.com 6 jnabwangu@sparerlaw.com

CLASS COUNSEL

Filed: March 19, 2010

AMENDED [PROPOSED] ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEYS' FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF LITIGATION EXPENSES AND LEAD PLAINTIFFS' COSTS AND EXPENSES CLASS ACTION Date: February 9, 2012 Time: 1:30 p.m. Dept: Courtroom 8, 4th Floor Judge: Hon. Lucy H. Koh

and for Reimbursement of Lead Plaintiffs' Costs and Expenses ("Fee Motion") duly came before 3 the Court for hearing on February 9, 2012. The Court has considered the Fee Motion and 4 supporting materials, and all matters presented at the February 9, 2012 hearing. The Fee Motion 5 and the supporting materials include detailed descriptions of the work performed and evidence of 6 prevailing market rates. Due and adequate notice having been given to the Class as required by 7 the Court's Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Settlement and Approval of Notice Plan 8 Class Counsel's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Reimbursement of Litigation Expenses ("Preliminary Approval Order," Dkt. 99), and the Court having considered all papers filed and 9 proceedings herein, and otherwise being fully informed of the proceedings, and good cause 10 appearing therefor,

NOW, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. This Order incorporates by reference the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement, dated as of July 28, 2011 (Dkt. 97) ("Stipulation"), and all capitalized terms used, but not defined herein, shall have the same meaning as in the Stipulation.

16 and all parties to the action, including all members of the Class. 19 million Settlement Amount), payable to Class Counsel. 20 21 litigation expenses in the amount of $105,959.58, payable to Class Counsel. 22 23 total amount of $13,353 for his costs and time spent directly relating to his representation of the 24 7. The Court grants Lead Plaintiff James Darst's request for reimbursement in the 26 total amount of $12,198 for his costs and time spent directly relating to his representation of the 27 Class. 28 2. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the above-captioned action 3. Class Counsel's Fee Motion is hereby GRANTED.

4. The Court hereby awards attorneys' fees of $1.375 million (25% of the $5.5 5. The Court grants Class Counsel's request for reimbursement of Class Counsel's 6. The Court grants Lead Plaintiff James Rafton's request for reimbursement in the Class. 25 8. The awarded attorneys' fees and litigation expenses, and reimbursement to Lead Plaintiffs may be paid immediately upon entry of this Order, subject to the terms, conditions, and 3 obligations of the Stipulation. 4 9. The Court finds that an award of 25% of the Settlement Amount is consistent with 5 the Ninth Circuit's "benchmark," and is fair and reasonable in light of, among others, the 6 following factors: the contingent nature of the case; the risks of litigation; the quality of the legal 7 services rendered; the benefits derived by the Class; awards made in similar cases; the lodestar 8 cross-check, which yields a 1.13 multiplier; and the reaction of the Class. 9

10. The Court further finds that the request for reimbursement of litigation expenses is 10 reasonable in light of Class Counsel's prosecution of this Action against Defendants on behalf of 11 the Class. 12

11. There is no just reason for delay in the entry of this Order, and immediate entry of 13 this Order by the Clerk of the Court is expressly directed. 14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120209

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.