Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Verdugo v. Denali Water Solutions, LLC

United States District Court, C.D. California

September 16, 2019

ENRIQUE VERDUGO, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
v.
DENALI WATER SOLUTIONS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive Defendants.

          ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AND JUDGMENT

          HONORABLE OTIS D. WRIGHT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         ORDER

         This matter has come before the Court on the unopposed motion by Plaintiff ENRIQUE VERDUGO ("Plaintiff), on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated employees of Defendant DENALI WATER SOLUTIONS ("Defendant") (collectively, "the parties") for final approval of the parties' Amended Joint Stipulation of Class Action Settlement ("Settlement Agreement") pursuant to Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Motion will be heard with Plaintiffs concurrently filed motion for an Order awarding the requested attorneys' fees and reasonable litigation costs to Plaintiff's counsel and awarding the Class Representative Enhancement and Incentive Award to Plaintiff, as addressed in detail in the parties' Settlement Agreement.

         A copy of the original Settlement Agreement was provided at Exhibit A to Class Counsel's declaration in support of the motion for preliminary approval document (see ECF No. 31-3). A copy of the Amended Joint Stipulation of Class Action Settlement, which only listed the revisions from the original Agreement, was provided at Exhibit A to Class Counsel's Declaration in support of the supplemental motion for preliminary approval documents. (See ECF No. 34-3). The Amended Settlement incorporated the original and together constitute the Settlement Agreement. Copies of the Settlement Agreement and the Amended Settlement Agreement were also provided for the Court's review at Exhibit A to the concurrently filed declaration of Plaintiff s counsel, David Yeremian, Esq.

         The Court preliminarily approved the Parties' Settlement and their proposed resolution of Plaintiff's class and representative claims on behalf of the California Class Members ("the Settlement Class Members") on May 6, 2019 by entering its Order granting preliminary approval to the Settlement Agreement, and set the final approval hearing for September 16, 2019. (ECF No. 36).

         In accordance with the order granting preliminary approval, and in compliance with due process, the Settlement Administrator (ILYM Group, Inc.) sent the Class Notice to each of the 75 Class Members. The Class Notice informed them of the terms of the Settlement, the right to participate in the Settlement, the right to object to the Settlement, the right to request exclusion and pursue their own remedies, and the right to appear in person or by counsel at the final approval hearing regarding final approval of the Settlement.

         The motion for final approval seeks final approval of the Settlement and entry of judgment that will bind each Settlement Class Member and will operate as a full release and discharge of the Settled Claims (as defined in the Settlement Agreement).

         Having received and considered Plaintiff's motion for final approval of the Settlement, Plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees, costs and Class Representative Incentive Awards, the file in this case, and the evidence and argument received by the Court before entering the Preliminary Approval Order and before and in connection with the final approval hearing, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES THAT:

         1. The terms in this order shall have the same meaning as assigned to them in the Settlement Agreement.

         2. The Settlement Administrator (ILYM Group, Inc.) has fulfilled its initial notice and reporting duties under the Settlement Agreement.

         3. The Class Notice: (i) was the best practicable notice under the facts and circumstances of this case; (ii) was reasonably calculated to apprise Class Members of the pendency of the Action, their right to participate in the Settlement, their right to exclude themselves from the Settlement, and their right to object to, and/or appear at the Final Approval Hearing for, the Settlement; and (iii) constituted due, adequate, and sufficient notice of a class settlement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, due process, and any other applicable rules or law. No Class Member requested exclusion from the Settlement, and no one objected to it. Therefore, there are 75 total Settlement Class Members.

         4. The notice of settlement served by Plaintiff on the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency ("LWDA") satisfied the requirements of PAGA. The LWDA has expressed no objection to the Settlement.

         5. The terms of the Settlement are fair, reasonable and adequate, and the standards and applicable requirements for final approval of this class action settlement are satisfied, including the provisions of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

         6. The Settlement has been reached as a result of intensive, serious, and non-collusive, arms-length negotiations and was achieved with the aid of an experienced mediator. The Settlement was ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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