Rahman v. Gate Gourmet, Inc. et al, No. 3:2020cv03047 - Document 79 (N.D. Cal. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL AND MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS by Judge William H. Orrick re: 73 Motion for Attorney Fees and 75 Motion for Settlement. (jmd, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/23/2023)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Rahman v. Gate Gourmet, Inc. et al Doc. 79 Case 3:20-cv-03047-WHO Document 79 Filed 02/23/23 Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MOHAMMED RAHMAN, et al., Plaintiffs, 8 GATE GOURMET, INC., et al., Defendants. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL AND MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS v. 9 10 Case No. 20-cv-03047-WHO Re: Dkt. Nos. 73, 75 The unopposed Motion for Motion for Class Action and PAGA Settlement and 13 Administration Costs, filed by Plaintiffs Mohammed Rahman (deceased), Alicia Noemi Bautista 14 Diaz, and Pascal Moore (“Plaintiffs”), came on for hearing on February 22, 2023, at 2:00 p.m., in 15 Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco Courthouse, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 16 94102, of the above captioned court, the Honorable William H. Orrick presiding. 17 Having reviewed the papers and documents presented, having heard the statements of 18 counsel, having considered the matter, and good cause appearing, the Court HEREBY ORDERS 19 as follows: 20 IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT: 21 1. This Judgment incorporates by reference the definitions in the Class Action and 22 Private Attorneys General Act Settlement Agreement and Release (the “Settlement Agreement” or 23 the “Settlement,” attached as Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Hallie Von Rock in Support of 24 Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action and PAGA Representative Settlement 25 (ECF 66-1)) and all capitalized terms used herein shall have the same meanings as set forth in the 26 Settlement unless set forth differently herein. The terms of Settlement are fully incorporated in this 27 Judgment as if set forth fully here. 28 2. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and all Parties to Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:20-cv-03047-WHO Document 79 Filed 02/23/23 Page 2 of 6 1 2 3. Class Members and Aggrieved Employees means all individuals employed at any 3 Gate Gourmet facility in California as a non-exempt employee at any time from May 4, 2016 4 through October 3, 2022 (the date of the preliminary approval of the settlement by the Court). See 5 Settlement Agreement at ¶ 9(b). The Settlement Class Period is from May 4, 2016 through 6 October 3, 2022. Id. 7 8 9 United States District Court Northern District of California the action, including all Class Members and Aggrieved Employees. 4. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(3), all such persons or entities who satisfy the Class definition above are Class Members bound by this Judgment. 5. The Court directed that notice be given to Class Members by mail and electronic 10 mail pursuant to the notice process proposed by the Parties in the Settlement and approved by the 11 Court. (ECF 71). The declaration from Atticus Administration (“Atticus”), attesting to the 12 dissemination of the notice to the Class, demonstrates compliance with this Court’s Preliminary 13 Approval Order. The Class Notice advised Class Members of the terms of the settlement; the 14 Final Approval Hearing and their right to appear at such hearing; their rights to object to the 15 settlement; the procedures for exercising such rights; the options for choosing an electronic 16 payment; and the binding effect of this Judgment, whether favorable or unfavorable, to the Class. 17 6. The distribution of the notice to the Class constituted the best notice practicable 18 under the circumstances, and fully satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 23, the requirements of due process, and any other applicable law. 20 7. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(2), the Court finds after a 21 hearing and based upon all submissions of the Parties and other persons that the Settlement 22 proposed by the Parties is fair, reasonable, and adequate. The terms and provisions of the 23 Settlement are the product of arms-length negotiations conducted in good faith and with the 24 assistance of an experienced mediator, Hunter Hughes, III, Esq. There were no objections to the 25 Settlement and approval of the Settlement will result in substantial savings of time, money and 26 effort to the Court and the Parties, and will further the interests of justice. 27 28 8. Upon the Final Approval by the Court of the Settlement Agreement, and except as to such rights or claims as may be created by this Agreement, each Participating Class Member 2 United States District Court Northern District of California Case 3:20-cv-03047-WHO Document 79 Filed 02/23/23 Page 3 of 6 1 fully releases and discharges Defendants, their present, former, and future parents, subsidiaries, 2 affiliates, predecessors, successors and assigns, and each of their respective past and present 3 members, shareholders, directors, officers, employees, agents, servants, registered representatives, 4 insurers and attorneys (collectively hereafter, the “Released Parties”) from any and all claims, 5 debts, liabilities, demands, claims for restitution or injunctive relief, obligations, guarantees, costs, 6 expenses, attorneys’ fees, damages, interest, liquidated damages, penalties, loss of wages, actions, 7 causes of action and any other relief (of whatever kind or nature, whether known or unknown) that 8 were asserted in the Action or could have been asserted based on the Factual Predicates, from May 9 4, 2016 through the date of the Final Approval of the settlement by the Court, including but not 10 limited to Claims for violations of California law pertaining to (1) failure to pay wages for all 11 hours worked, (2) failure to pay overtime wages, (3) failure to authorize and provide meal periods, 12 (4) failure to authorize and permit rest periods, (5) failure to timely pay earned wages, (6) failure 13 to furnish accurate wage statements, (7) waiting time penalties, (8) unfair business practices, and 14 (9) PAGA civil penalties to the extent based on the six immediately preceding and identified 15 issues in Subsections (1)-(8). This release includes but is not limited to claims for violations of 16 California Labor Code §§ 201, 202, 204, 223, 226, 226.7, 510, 512, 558, 1174, 1197, 1197.1, 17 1198, 1199, and § 2698, et seq.; IWC Wage Order No. 5, §§ 3, 4, 9, and 11; California Code of 18 Civil Procedure § 1021.5; California Business & Professions Code § 17200, et seq. (to the extent 19 based on the same protections as provided by each of the statutes listed immediately above) that 20 are or could be based on the Factual Predicates.. Class Members who are not Participating Class 21 Members release claims under PAGA only. (All together collectively, “Released Claims”). The 22 “Factual Predicates” shall consist of all assertions of fact in any complaint filed by any or all of 23 Plaintiffs against either or both Defendants from May 4, 2020, through the date of Final Approval 24 and all assertions of fact made in any notice to the LWDA from any or all of Plaintiffs regarding 25 either or both Defendants from May 4, 2020, through the date of Final Approval. 26 a. In order to achieve a full and complete release of the Released Parties as to 27 the release directly above, the Representative Plaintiffs and each Participating Class 28 Member acknowledge that the release directly above is also intended to include in its effect 3 Case 3:20-cv-03047-WHO Document 79 Filed 02/23/23 Page 4 of 6 1 all such Released Claims listed above whether or not the Representative Plaintiffs and each 2 Participating Class Member know or suspect them to exist. b. United States District Court Northern District of California 3 If any Participating Class Member initiates a new lawsuit against 4 Defendants based on any claim released under this Agreement, and the Court invalidates 5 the release, any recovery by the Participating Class Member shall be offset by the amount, 6 if any, paid to the Participating Class Member in connection with this Settlement. The 7 language in this Paragraph shall be included in the Notice of Settlement. 8 9. Claims administrator Atticus Administration is entitled to $31,893, as estimated, 9 for settlement administration to be paid out of the Settlement Fund. (ECF No. 76, ¶ 16). If the 10 reasonable costs of administration exceed that estimation, Atticus may ask the Court to award a 11 higher amount. 12 10. Plaintiffs’ motion for an award of attorney fees is GRANTED. The Court finds 13 that an award exceeding the 25% benchmark is justified, and awards plaintiffs’ counsel fees in the 14 amount of 30% of the $3,850,000 Settlement Fund. Plaintiffs’ request for an award of actual costs 15 at $52,546,67 to be paid from the Settlement Fund is GRANTED. 16 11. Plaintiffs’ request for incentive awards for the three names class representatives, 17 Mohammed Rahman (deceased), Alicia Noemi Bautista Diaz, and Pascal Moore is GRANTED. 18 Having considered the contributions of each plaintiff to the litigation – as substantiated by their 19 declarations and declarations of counsel, particularly their extensive assistance in discovery and 20 responses to questions from counsel during the mediation – and given the wage and hour context, I 21 find that an award of $7,500 for each named plaintiff is appropriate. With respect to the incentive 22 award for plaintiff Mohammed Rahman, plaintiffs’ counsel shall notify the client’s next of kin of 23 the existence and location of the funds (to be held by the Claims Administrator) so that they can 24 take whatever steps are necessary to establish the appropriate distribution of the funds. The next 25 of kin may petition this Court for an order releasing the funds from the Claims Administrator. If 26 no efforts have been made to release the funds within a year of the date of this Order, the funds 27 shall be distributed to cy pres. 28 12. $288,750.00 shall be paid from the Settlement Fund to the California Labor & 4 Case 3:20-cv-03047-WHO Document 79 Filed 02/23/23 Page 5 of 6 1 Workforce Development Agency for the PAGA claim. 13. 2 3 in the Northern District’s Procedural Guidance for Class Action Settlements. In addition to the 4 information contained in the Guidance, the post-distribution accounting must discuss any 5 significant or recurring concerns communicated by class members to the settlement administrator 6 or counsel since final approval, any other issues in settlement administration since final approval, 7 and how any concerns or issues were resolved. 14. 8 United States District Court Northern District of California Counsel shall adhere to the post-distribution accounting requirements as reflected Counsel have not identified the proposed cy pres recipient for any funds leftover at 9 the end of the Claims Administration Process. When submitting the post-distribution accounting, 10 plaintiffs’ counsel shall identify the proposed cy pres recipient(s) of any remaining funds from the 11 Settlement Fund for the Court’s approval. 15. 12 13 schedule: 14 • Good cause appearing, the Court hereby approves the following implementation Effective Date Upon is the latest date of execution by all Parties, Class Counsel, 15 Defendants’ counsel, and Final Approval from the Court, following Notice to Class 16 Members and a formal fairness hearing and entry of a final judgment by the Court; 17 • Deadline for Administrator to make all payments due under the Settlement - Within ten (10) business days of the Payment Date; 18 19 • Check-cashing / Digital Payment deadline - 180 days after issuance; 20 • Deadline for Administrator to either distribute uncashed check funds to cy pres recipient or redistribute such funds - As soon as practicable after check-cashing deadline; 21 22 • Deadline for Plaintiffs to file a Post-Distribution Accounting - Within 21 days after the 23 distribution of any remaining monies to Class Members who cashed their Settlement 24 Award check or to the cy pres recipient. 25 26 27 28 16. The Court hereby dismisses with prejudice the Action, and the Released Parties are hereby released from all further liability for the Released Claims. 17. Without affecting the finality of this Judgment, the Court reserves jurisdiction over the implementation, administration and enforcement of this Judgment and the Settlement, and all 5 Case 3:20-cv-03047-WHO Document 79 Filed 02/23/23 Page 6 of 6 1 2 matters ancillary thereto. 18. The Court finding that no reason exists for delay in ordering final judgment pursuant to 3 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), the clerk is hereby directed to enter this Judgment 4 forthwith. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 23, 2023 7 8 William H. Orrick United States District Judge 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
