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.

Pecover v. Electronic Arts Inc.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

September 10, 2013

GEOFFREY PECOVER and ANDREW OWENS, on behalf of themselves and a class of person similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
ELECTRONIC ARTS INC., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant.

Shana E. Scarlett (217895), HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP, Berkeley, CA, Stuart M. Paynter (226147), THE PAYNTER LAW FIRM PLLC, Washington, DC, Steve W. Berman (Pro Hac Vice), HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP, Seattle, WA, Class Counsel.

TIMOTHY L. O'MARA, Daniel M. Wall (102580) Timothy L. O'Mara (212731) Kirsten M. Ferguson (252781) LATHAM & WATKINS LLP, San Francisco, CA, Attorneys for Defendant Electronic Arts Inc.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING LATE CLAIMS

CLAUDIA WILKEN, District Judge.

Plaintiffs Geoffrey Pecover and Andrew Owens and Defendant Electronic Arts Inc. ("EA") (collectively, "the Parties"), hereby stipulate as follows:

1. WHEREAS, as of August 29, 2013, the Settlement Administrator has received 249 late claims;

2. WHEREAS, the value of the late claims does not exceed $50, 000;

3. WHEREAS, EA does not oppose permitting payment of late claims received as of August 29, 2013 as if timely made;

4. WHEREAS, sufficient funds remain in the Settlement Fund to pay late claims without any pro rata reductions to timely claims;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE, through their respective counsel of record, that:

1. The Settlement Administrator shall be authorized to pay late claims received as of August 29, 2013 as if such claims were timely made. See In re Valdez, 289 Fed.Appx. 204, 206 (9th Cir. 2008) (recognizing that the district court accepted a limited number of late-filed claims); Lemus v. H&R Block Enters., LLC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103037 (N.D. Cal. July 23, 2013) ("A district court has discretion to allow late claims to a settlement fund.");

2. Payment of late claims received as of August 29, 2013 shall not constitute a waiver of, or in any other way affect, any rights, including but not limited to any and all releases, granted to EA and/or the Released Parties by the Court's May 30, 2013 Final Judgment And Order Of Dismissal With Prejudice (Doc. #465), the Settlement Agreement (Doc. #381), or otherwise.

Plaintiffs' undersigned counsel, Shana E. Scarlett, hereby attests that Timothy O'Mara, counsel for Defendant, concurs in the filing of this Stipulation, in accordance with Civil Local Rule 5-1.

PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES' STIPULATION, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The Settlement Administrator shall be authorized to pay late claims received as of August 29, 2013 as if such claims were timely made. See In re Valdez, 289 Fed.Appx. 204, 206 (9th Cir. 2008) (recognizing that the district court accepted a limited number of late-filed claims); Lemus v. H&R Block Enters., LLC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103037 (N.D. Cal. July 23, 2013) ("A district court has discretion to allow late claims to a settlement fund.");
2. Payment of late claims received as of August 29, 2013 shall not constitute a waiver of, or in any other way affect, any rights, including but not limited to any and all releases, granted to EA and/or the Released Parties by the Court's May 30, 2013 Final Judgment And Order Of Dismissal With Prejudice (Doc. #465), the Settlement Agreement (Doc. #381), or otherwise.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.