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.

Rodriguez v. Bcforward Razor LLC

United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division

October 21, 2019

JESSE RODRIGUEZ, an individual, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
v.
BCFORWARD RAZOR LLC, an Indiana Limited Liability Company, BUCHER AND CHRISTIAN CONSULTING, INC., an Indiana Corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants.

          DAVID YEREMIAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. David Yeremian Jason Rothman UNITED EMPLOYEES LAW GROUP, PC Walter Haines Attorneys for Plaintiff Jesse Rodriguez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated.

          [PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER: (1) GRANTING MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT; AND (2) GRANTING MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT PAYMENT

          Honorable Edward J. Davila United States District Judge

         ORDER AND JUDGMENT

         On October 17, 2019, the Court heard Plaintiff Jesse Rodriguez's (“Plaintiff”) Unopposed Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs and Class Representative Enhancement at Final Approval of Class Action Settlement (“Fees and Costs Motion”) and unopposed Motion for Final Approval Class and Collective Action Settlement as set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement of Class Action and Release (“Settlement” or “Settlement Agreement”) in the above-captioned action. In accordance with the Order Granting Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class and Collective Settlement, Approval of Class Notice and Setting Final Approval Hearing (ECF No. 49), Class Members have been given notice of the terms of the Settlement and an opportunity to object to the Settlement, comment on it and exclude themselves from it. Having considered the Settlement and the papers submitted by the Parties in support of final approval of Settlement, the Court hereby orders and makes determinations as follows:

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

         2. The Court finds that class certification of the following Class, for settlement purposes only, is appropriate under Rule 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 29 U.S.C. 200 et seq.: All non-exempt Customer Service Representatives, Application Support Specialists, Contact Center Agents, Customer Support Agents, Subscription Support Agents, Customer Service Agents, Incubation Specialists, Product Specialist Support Agents, Premium Customer Service Representatives, Renewals Specialists, Developer Support Operations Specialists, App Technical Supports, Technical Support Analysts, Application Review Analysts and In-Store Tech Supports who have provided resources to Accenture LLP through their employment with BCForward Razor LLC in California from April 23, 2014 through April 30, 2019.

         3. The Court finds that the Class meets the ascertainability, numerosity, commonality and typicality requirements to justify certification and that resolution of this matter through a class action is superior to other available methods.

         4. The Court finds that Plaintiff Jesse Rodriguez is an adequate class representative and appoints him as such.

         5. The Court finds that Class Counsel, David Yeremian and Jason Rothman of David Yeremian & Associates, Inc. have adequately represented the Class, and their appointment as Class Counsel is confirmed.

         FINAL APPROVAL OF NOTICE PROGRAM

         6. Pursuant to the Court's Order Granting Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class and Collective Settlement, Approval of Class Notice and Setting Final Approval Hearing (ECF No. 49), a Notice of Class Action Settlement (“Class Notice”) was mailed to Class Members by first class mail. The Class Notice: (i) was the best practicable notice and satisfied the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Constitutional due process; (ii) was reasonably calculated to apprise Class Members of the pendency of the Action, the terms of the Settlement, their right to participate in the Settlement, their right to exclude themselves from the Settlement, and their right to object to the Settlement, 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. The Court finds that these procedures afforded protections to Class Members and provided the basis for the Court to make an informed decision and approval of the Settlement.

         FINAL APPROVAL OF THE SETTLEMENT

         7. 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.

         8. 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 ...


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.