United States District Court, N.D. California
JUDGMENT RE: DKT. NOS. 117, 118
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
before the Court is a request for entry of judgment filed by
Plaintiffs Robin Berman, Bo Kang, Khashayar Mirfakhraei,
Thang Van Vu, Donna Viera-Castillo, Girish Ramesh, Patrick
Hanley, Ilana Shternshain, and Mandy Schwarz, under Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 58(d). See Dkt. No. 117.
March 22, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiffs' motion for
partial summary judgment. See Dkt. No. 95. The Court
concluded that (1) Plaintiffs were entitled to severance
benefits under ERISA § 502(a)(1)(B); and (2) Defendants
were liable for breach of fiduciary duty under ERISA §
502(a)(3). See Id. at 9-13. The Court did not,
however, assess what damages Plaintiffs may be entitled to as
a result of its ruling regarding liability. See Id.
at 14. The parties subsequently stipulated to the amount of
unpaid severance benefits owed each Plaintiff, and Plaintiffs
filed a motion for summary judgment seeking an additional ten
percent per annum, as either an equitable surcharge or
prejudgment interest. See Dkt. No. 100 at 3-13. On
September 3, 2019, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion,
finding that Plaintiffs failed to provide any evidence that
would permit the Court to award an equitable surcharge or
prejudgment interest above the default interest rate
prescribed in 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a). See Dkt. No.
112. Plaintiffs subsequently withdrew their request for such
a remedy. See Dkt. No. 115.
do not object to Plaintiffs' request for entry of
judgment, or their request for an award of prejudgment
interest in general. See Dkt. No. 118 at 1. However,
the parties still disagree as to the appropriate award of
prejudgment interest. Compare Dkt. No. 117
with Dkt. No. 118; Dkt. No. 104 at 7, n.2.
Defendants reiterate that the default statutory rate is
appropriate. See Dkt. No. 118 at 3-4. Plaintiffs, on
the other hand, suggest that a higher award may be
appropriate, although they still do not proffer any further
evidence in support of this request, and leave it to the
Court's discretion. See Dkt. No. 117 at 2-3. The
Court finds no basis to reconsider its ruling on
Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment seeking an award
of prejudgment interest at a ten percent per annum rate, or
otherwise depart from the interest rate prescribed in 28
U.S.C. § 1961(a).
all merits having been resolved and for good cause shown,
judgment on Plaintiffs' claims shall be and accordingly
is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants for
the following amounts:
• Robin Berman - $57, 984.94
• Tom Vu - $63, 390.59
• Donna Vierra-Castillo - $67, 177.98
• Khashayar Mirfakhraei - $79, 591.28
• Bo Kang - $76, 454.88
• Girish Ramesh - $84, 349.18
• Patrick Hanley - $63, 658.35
• Mandy Schwarz - $72, 286.25
• Ilana Shternshain - $59, ...