United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
IN RE CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) ANTITRUST LITIGATION MDL No. 1917 This Document Relates to: All Indirect Purchaser Actions
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT OF
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AS TO THE PHILIPS, PANASONIC,
HITACHI, TOSHIBA, SAMSUNG SDI, THOMSON, AND TDA
DEFENDANTS
Honorable Jon S. Tigar Judge
This
matter has come before the Court to determine whether there
is any cause why this Court should not approve the
settlements with the Philips, [1] Panasonic, [2] Hitachi,
[3]
Toshiba, [4] Samsung SDI, [5] Thomson, [6] and
TDA[7]
Defendants (collectively “Settling Defendants”)
set forth in the respective settlement agreements
(“Settlements”) relating to the above-captioned
litigation, In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust
Litigation, Case No.3:07-cv-05944 JST, MDL No. 1917
(N.D. Cal.) (“Action”). The Court after carefully
considering all papers filed and proceedings held herein and
otherwise being fully informed in the premises, has
determined that: (1) the Settlements should be approved; and
(2) there is no just reason for delay of the entry of this
final Judgment approving the Settlements. Accordingly, the
Court directs entry of Judgment which shall constitute a
final adjudication of this case on the merits as to the
parties to the Settlements. Good cause appearing therefor, it
is:
ORDERED,
ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT:
1. The
Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this
litigation, and all actions within this litigation and over
the parties to the Settlements, including all members of the
Class and the Settling Defendants.
2. The
definitions of terms set forth in the Settlements are
incorporated hereby as though fully set forth in this
Judgment.
3. The
Court hereby finally approves and confirms the settlements
set forth in the Settlements and finds that said settlements
are, in all respects, fair, reasonable and adequate to the
Class pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure and all applicable state laws.
4. The
persons/entities set out in Exhibit 1, attached hereto, have
timely and validly requested exclusion from the Class and,
therefore, are excluded. Such persons/entities are not
included in or bound by this Final Judgment. Such
persons/entities are not entitled to any recovery from the
settlement proceeds obtained through the Settlements.
5. The
Court hereby dismisses on the merits and with prejudice the
claims asserted by the Plaintiffs against the Settling
Defendants, which were certified as a settlement class in the
Court’s Order Granting Final Approval of the
Settlements (ECF No. 4712), with Plaintiffs and Settling
Defendants to bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees
except as provided for in the Settlements.
6. All
persons and entities who are defined in the Settlements as
Releasors are hereby barred and enjoined from commencing,
prosecuting, or continuing any claims, demands, actions,
suits, or causes of action, or otherwise seeking to establish
liability, against Settling Defendants
(“Releasees”) based, in whole or in part, upon
any of the Released Claims or conduct at issue in the
Released Claims.
7.
Releasees are hereby and forever released and discharged with
respect to any and all claims, demands, actions, suits, or
causes of action which the Releasors had or have arising out
of or related to any of the Released Claims.
8. The
notice given to the Class of the settlements set forth in the
Settlements and other matters set forth therein was the best
notice practicable under the circumstances. Said notice
provided due and adequate notice of the proceedings and of
the matters set forth therein, including the proposed
settlements set forth in the Settlements, to all persons
entitled to such notice, and said notice fully satisfied the
requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, the requirements of due process, and all
applicable state laws.
9.
Eleven objections to the Settlements were filed by 22
objectors. The objections are hereby overruled for the
reasons set forth in the Court’s Order Granting Final
Approval of Indirect Purchaser Settlements, ECF No. 4712.
10.
Without affecting the finality of this Judgment in any way,
this Court hereby retains continuing and exclusive
jurisdiction over: (a) implementation of these settlements
and any distribution to Class Members pursuant to further
orders of this Court; (b) disposition of the Settlement Fund;
(c) hearing and determining applications by Plaintiffs’
Class Counsel for attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses,
including expert fees and costs, and other such items; (d)
the Class Action until the final judgments contemplated
hereby have become effective and each and every act agreed to
be performed by the parties all have been performed pursuant
to the Settlements; and (e) all parties to the Class Action
and Releasees for the purpose of enforcing and administering
the Settlements and the mutual releases and other documents
contemplated by, or executed in connection with, the
Settlements.
11. In
the event that any of the settlements do not become effective
in accordance with the terms of that Settlement, then the
judgment as to that Settling Defendant shall be rendered null
and void and shall be vacated, and in such event, all orders
entered and releases delivered in connection herewith shall
be null and void and, except as otherwise ...