Case 5:15-cv BLF Document Filed 05/01/17 Page 1 of 6

Similar documents
Exhibit 2 RFQ Engagement Letter

General Terms and Conditions

If you sought health insurance coverage or benefits from MAGNETIC STIMULATION ( TMS )

Case 3:11-cv JAH-NLS Document Filed 08/13/12 Page 1 of 18

General Terms and Conditions

KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, WASHINGTON STATE CAUSE NO SEA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION


Case KG Doc 501 Filed 07/23/18 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD CELLTRION, INC. Petitioner

Case 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 1 of 10

MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Parent/Student Rights in Identification, Evaluation, and Placement

CSA Briefing Note Regarding Joint Application against the University and Re-Commencing Collection of CFS/CFS-O Fees

Purpose: Policy: The Fair Hearing Plan is not applicable to mid-level providers. Grounds for a Hearing

Attachment 5 2. SCOPE OF DOCUMENT

Family Tariff. General Tariff Information. Scope of the family referral. Extended Services

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

Return Date: February 27, 2002

Case 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed 10/30/17 Page 1 of 10

Z E N I T H M E D I C A L P R O V I D E R N E T W O R K P O L I C Y Title: Provider Appeal of Network Exclusion Policy

Proposition 65 and Supplements

U.S. District Court District of Delaware (Wilmington) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:04-cv KAJ

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE SELF-HELP CENTER HOW TO CHANGE A HEARING DATE FOR THE HEARING ON DV RESTRAINING ORDERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:17-cv ECF No. 1 filed 10/26/17 PageID.1 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

HIPAA FOR THE DENTAL PRACTICE

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE


Case 1:09-cv RMB-AMD Document 1 Filed 08/12/09 Page 1 of 6 PageID: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 2:12-cv KJM-GGH Document 1 Filed 07/02/12 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. (Sacramento Division)

Due Process Hearing Request Information Sheet and Model Form

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON UM 1832

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT HEARINGS BEFORE HEARING EXAMINER

Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department D56435 L/hu

Case3:14-cv WHO Document59 Filed04/13/15 Page1 of 12

Act 443 of 2009 House Bill 1379

Case: 3:17-cv wmc Document #: 1 Filed: 11/01/17 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

Special Education Fact Sheet. Special Education Impartial Hearings in New York City

Case 1:09-cv WWC -MCC Document 607 Filed 06/11/12 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Grievance Procedure of the Memphis Housing Authority

CIRCUIT COURT OF DUNN COUNTY LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN NARRATIVE

OUTPATIENT SERVICES PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES CONTRACT

State of Connecticut Department of Education Division of Teaching and Learning Programs and Services Bureau of Special Education

[HAC ADVOCACY MANUAL]

if accepted, FINRA will not

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY. Defendant OLYMPUS AMERICA INC. ( OAI ) answers and asserts its affirmative

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY. Case No.: Plaintiffs Tammie Aust, Alison Grennan, Jennifer Schill, and Lang You Mau, by and

Stallings, Kristy. Kristy,

State Statutes Requiring the Provision of Sign Language 12/2008 Interpreters to Parties to Civil Proceedings

ACC ARIZONA CHAPTER ANNUAL PREFERRED VENDOR SPONSORSHIP PROGRAM PREFERRED VENDOR SPONSORSHIP PROGRAM

Case 1:14-cv JEB Document 1 Filed 05/28/14 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case: 3:12-cv WHR-MJN Doc #: 72 Filed: 10/21/15 Page: 1 of 14 PAGEID #: 943

Case: 1:15-cv SO Doc #: 103 Filed: 01/19/17 1 of 14. PageID #: 1687

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Hello, Fundraiser! All the best, Julie Lowe Ronald McDonald House Charities of Greater Washington, DC

DELTA DENTAL PREMIER

Case3:09-cv JSW Document106-7 Filed01/31/11 Page1 of 15 EXHIBIT 24

e Magnus Advantage Imagine... Imagine a case where you know the impact of human dynamics, in addition to the law and the issues...

PHILIP R. KIMBALL, as Administrator of the Estate of CARLA M. KIMBALL, Deceased, Plaintiff, vs. R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, Defendant.

Case 2:14-cv Document 1 Filed 12/17/14 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTEN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

City of Carson 701 E. Carson St., Carson, CA Telephone: (310) ; ci.carson.ca.us

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/06/ :00 PM INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 69 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/06/2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

CHAPTER 2: PUBLIC BENEFITS

METROLINX ADMINISTRATIVE FEE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS RULES OF PRACTICE

These Rules of Membership apply in respect of all Products purchased by a Member from Sigma (and any Program Partner) on or after 1 February 2017.

The Changing Landscape of Opioids & Workers Compensation. Presented by: David Campbell, MA, CRC State of Michigan Workers Compensation Agency

[HAC ADVOCACY MANUAL]

STATE OF FLORIDA BOARD OF MASSAGE-THERAPY

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER. June 27, Appearances

Case 1:15-cv ARR-VVP Document 1 Filed 09/23/15 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1. Plaintiff, Defendant. COMPLAINT

Judicial conflict between Bristol-Myers Squibb Co V. Merck & Co Inc. Keytruda V. Opdivo

By Laws: Spinal Cord Injury Research Fund Board Board Approval May 2, 2014

4. The time limit, not less than thirty (30) calendar days, for requesting a Hearing in writing.

Case 2:15-cv SRC-CLW Document 9 Filed 02/04/16 Page 1 of 19 PageID: 246

South Carolina General Assembly 122nd Session,

(4) Be as detailed as necessary to provide history of work performed; and:

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

Case MDL No Document 2546 Filed 09/20/18 Page 1 of 11 BEFORE THE UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

Corporate Policies. Corporate Billing and Collection Policy Section:

SECTION 504 NOTICE OF PARENT/STUDENT RIGHTS IN IDENTIFICATION/EVALUATION, AND PLACEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Cryopreservation Program Participation Agreement and Informed Consent

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION. Portland General Electric Company ) Docket No.

Objection! How Consumer Class Actions are Challenging Natural Labeling

2017 Social Service Funding Application - Special Alcohol Funds

Dallas ISD TERM CONTRACTS

HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AVIATION AUTHORITY AIRPORT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RULES OF PROCEDURE

FROM: Quinn Korbulic, IT Manager, Regional Services, Technology Services

Regulation of the Chancellor

WHEREAS, the Tennessee General Assembly finds that thousands of Tennesseans are

Illinois Supreme Court. Language Access Policy

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Transcription:

Case :-cv-0-blf Document - Filed 0/0/ Page of Gary A. Gotto (admitted pro hac vice) KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. N. Central Ave., Ste. 0 Phoenix, AZ 0 (0) -00 ggotto@kellerrohrback.com Juli E. Farris (CA Bar No. ) KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 0 Garden Street, Ste. 0 Santa Barbara, CA (0) - jfarris@kellerrohrback.com Attorneys for Plaintiff KRISTOPHER A. SCHWARTZ, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION Plaintiff, ART COOK; ROGER STANGER; RONALD ZIMMERMAN; BUCKLES-SMITH ELECTRIC COMPANY; BANKERS TRUST COMPANY OF SOUTH DAKOTA; AND JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS NUMBERED -, Defendants, No. :-cv-0 IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF S MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AND FOR ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS 0 and BUCKLES-SMITH ELECTRIC COMPANY EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN, Nominal Defendant. I, Gary A. Gotto, declare and state as follows: Judge: Hon. Beth Labson Freeman

Case :-cv-0-blf Document - Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 I am an attorney admitted to practice pro hac vice before this Court, and am a partner with the law firm Keller Rohrback L.L.P. ( Keller Rohrback ). Keller Rohrback has been appointed by the Court to be Class Counsel for Plaintiff and the Class in this action. I make this declaration of my own personal knowledge and am competent to testify to the facts stated herein. I make this declaration in support of the Plaintiff s Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Plaintiff s Motion for Award of Attorneys Fees and Costs. During the course of this litigation, Keller Rohrback has been involved in every aspect of this case from inception to present. This litigation was hard fought and involved inter alia, extensive investigation, consultation with potential experts, substantial discovery, review of documents, and legal research and briefing, all of which were necessary to obtain a settlement on behalf of the Settlement Class. Keller Rohrback kept files contemporaneously documenting all time spent, including tasks performed, and expenses incurred. All of the time and expenses reported by my firm were incurred for the benefit of Plaintiffs. The time spent by Keller Rohrback attorneys and staff have been completely contingent on the outcome. The firm has not been paid for any of the time spent on this case, nor has the firm been reimbursed for any expenses incurred thus far. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, Keller Rohrback serves as Settlement Administrator to the Settlement. In connection with that role, Class Counsel delivered Notice of the Settlement as approved by the Court to all Settlement Class Members by U.S. Mail on March, 0 at their last known address provided by Defendant Buckles-Smith. In addition, notice of the Settlement was provided to the United States Department of Labor that same day. Defense counsel also informed Class Counsel that Defendant Art Cook, CEO of Buckles- Smith, delivered a notice to all Buckles-Smith employees regarding the Settlement on March, 0.

Case :-cv-0-blf Document - Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 Class Counsel posted the Notice of Settlement on its website on March, 0 at the following address: http://www.kellersettlements.com/. The schedule attached as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein, is a detailed summary of the amount of time spent by Keller Rohrback s partners, attorneys and professional support staff who were involved in this litigation through March, 0, the day after the Court preliminary the Settlement reached between the parties. The summary of hours spent by Keller Rohrback professionals does not include any time devoted to prosecuting this case after March, 0, including the time and work involved in preparing the motion for attorneys fees and costs, this declaration, the final approval motion, and all other related pleadings thereto. Additional attorney time and expense will also be incurred in preparing for and appearing at the Court s Final Fairness Hearing. As Settlement Administrator, Class Counsel will also be responsible for continuing to administer the Settlement and to disburse the Settlement proceeds if the Court approves the Settlement. In my experience overseeing administration and disbursement of Settlement proceeds in the past, significant work remains to effectuate the Settlement. These hours will not be compensable. As set forth in Exhibit A, the total number of hours reasonably expended on this litigation by Keller Rohrback from inception to March, 0 is,. hours. The total lodestar for Keller Rohrback from inception to March, 0 is $,.0. Expense items are billed separately (and are set forth below), and are not duplicated in the lodestar calculation. These hours were incurred by, among other things, investigating the claims against Defendants, engaging in extensive factual and legal research, reviewing and analyzing relevant documents from Plaintiff, preparing and drafting the complaint and all amendments thereto, propounding discovery requests to Defendants, responding to discovery requests from Defendants, consulting with ERISA

Case :-cv-0-blf Document - Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 experts, and reviewing and analyzing financial documents. In additional, substantial attorney time was spent meeting and conferring and ultimately negotiating a settlement with Defense counsel. Keller Rohrback has submitted fee petitions in other cases that have reported hourly rates at amounts comparable to those submitted herein, and courts have approved an award of attorneys fees in such cases. Illustrative and non-exhaustive examples include: Griffith, et al. v. Providence Health & Servs., et al., No. -0 (W.D. Wash. Mar., 0) (ECF No. ) (approving Keller Rohrback s request for attorney fees at hourly rates similar to this case); Overall v. Ascension Health, No. - (E.D. Mich. Sept., 0) (ECF No. ) (approving Keller Rohrback s request for attorneys fees and cost request and finding hourly rates to be reasonable); Glaberson v. Comcast Corp., No. 0-0, 0 WL, at * (E.D. Pa. Sept., 0) (finding Keller Rohrback s hourly rates were reasonable); Herfert v. Crayola LLC, No. - (W.D. Wash. Apr., 0) (ECF No. ) (approving Keller Rohrback s hourly rates as reasonable); Fleishman v. Albany Medical Center, No. 0-cv-0-TJM-DRH (N.D.N.Y. Dec.. 0) (ECF No. ) (Court approved percentage-of-fund award cross-checked against hourly rates); In Re Merck & Co., Inc. Securities, Derivative & ERISA Litigation, MDL No. (SRC) (D.N.J. Nov., 0) (Doc. No. ) (Court approved percentage-of-fund award cross-checked against hourly rates); Jerry Cooper, Inc. v. Lifequotes of America, Inc., No. 0--00- SEA (Nov., 0) (ECF No. ) (Court approved percentage-of-fund award cross-checked against hourly rates); Johnson v. Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association, No. CV0--PHX-SRB (D. Ariz. Mar., 0) (ECF No. ) (Court approving percentage-of-fund award crosschecked against hourly rates); In Re IndyMac ERISA Litigation, No. CV 0- DDP(VBKx) (C.D. Cal. Jan., 0) (ECF No. ) (Court approving percentage-of-fund award cross-checked against rates); Buus v. WAMU Pension Plan, No. 0-CV-000 MJP (W.D. Wash. Oct., 0) (ECF No. ) (Court approving percentage-of-fund award cross-checked against hourly rates);

Case :-cv-0-blf Document - Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 In Re Washington Mutual, Inc. ERISA Litigation, No. :0-md-0-MJP (W.D. Wash. Oct., 0) (ECF No. -) (Court approving percentage-of-fund award cross-checked against hourly rates); Fouad v. Isilon Systems, Inc., No. 0- (W.D. Wash. Feb., 0) (ECF No. 0) (Court approving percentage-of-fund award cross-checked against hourly rates); and Pelletz v. Weyerhaueser Co., F. Supp. d, - (W.D. Wash. 00) (Court approved Keller Rohrback s hourly rates as reasonable). Keller Rohrback incurred a total of $,0. in unreimbursed expenses from inception to March, 0, all of which were reasonable and necessary for the prosecution of this litigation. A summary of those expenses by category is attached as Exhibit B. These expenses included, inter alia, expert costs, travel, computer research, discovery database services, photocopying, court costs, postage, and long-distance and facsimile charges. Consistent with the parties Settlement Agreement, the Notice sent to the Settlement Class, and the Court s preliminary approval order, Class Counsel seek no more than $,000 in reimbursable expenses. In undertaking to represent Plaintiffs, Keller Rohrback had to ensure that sufficient resources and funds existed at all times, not only to prosecute the litigation in a cost-effective manner, but also to compensate the experts and vendors that the firm engaged in this matter. The financial burden on contingent fee counsel is far greater than it is on firms that are paid on an ongoing basis throughout lengthy and complex litigation. In particular, Keller Rohrback bore the financial burden of litigating this case on a contingency fee basis for nearly two years since the filing of this complaint on July 0, 0. Pursuant to.. of the Settlement Agreement, the parties investigated whether to reconstitute the Plan and re-establish Plan accounts for Settlement Class Members. After evaluating the costs associated with reconstituting the Plan, the parties determined it would be too costly and would lessen the amount available to Plan participants. As a result, the Plan will not be reconstituted, and instead

Case :-cv-0-blf Document - Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 Class Counsel shall distribute each Class Member s Allocable Share of the Net Settlement Fund directly to each Class Member via settlement check. Pursuant to the applicable participant account balance statements provided by Defendant Buckles-Smith, the Class Members held (directly or through the ESOP) approximately,000 shares as of the date specified as applicable in Section.. of the Settlement Agreement. Assuming the Court grants Class Counsel s request for attorneys fees and costs for $,00 in fees and $,000 in costs, $0,00 will be distributed to the Settlement Class on a pro rata basis to each Class Member based on the amount of shares he or she owns under the Plan (or approximately $. per share). The above calculations are based on plan account statements provided by Defendants to Class Counsel to date. Class Counsel is in the process of verifying this information with Defendants, and the parties will be able to determine the specific allocation amount for each Settlement Class Member by the Final Fairness Hearing date. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED this st day of May, 0. KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. By: /s/ Gary A. Gotto Gary A. Gotto (admitted pro hac vice) ggotto@kellerrohrback.com North Central Avenue, Suite 0 Phoenix, Arizona 0 Telephone: (0) -00 Facsimile: (0) - Attorney for Plaintiff Kristopher A. Schwartz