Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-05264/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-05264-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 720
Nature of Suit: Labor Management Relations Act
Cause of Action: 29:185 Labor/Mgt. Relations (Contracts)

---

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL AND SETTLEMENT HEARING 

1

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

Sally M. Tedrow, Esq., pro hac vice 

stedrow@odonoghuelaw.com 

Francis J. Martorana, Esq., pro hac vice 

fmartorana@adonoghuelaw.com 

O’DONOGHUE & O’DONOGHUE LLP 

4748 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20016 

(202) 362-0041: Telephone 

(202) 237-1200: Facsimile 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Class 

James P. McLoughlin, Jr. (N.C. Bar No. 13795) (admitted pro hac vice) 

jimmcloughlin@mvalaw.com 

Alton L. Gwaltney, III (N.C. Bar No. 32394) (admitted pro hac vice) 

larrygwaltney@mvalaw.com 

Mark A. Nebrig (N.C. Bar No. 28710) (admitted pro hac vice) 

MOORE & VAN ALLEN PLLC 

100 North Tryon Street, Suite 4700 

Charlotte, NC 28202-4003 

Telephone: (704) 331-1000 

Facsimile: (704) 331-1059 

Attorneys for Defendant Rexam Inc. 

(Local Counsel Identified in Record)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BERENICE ANGOTTI, DANIEL 

BORRERO, RALPH E. COWLEY, JACK 

GRIFFITH, DONALD S. MUELLER, KENT 

D. RUSSELL, SR., BERNARD W. 

SCHREINER, and RAYMOND VALLI, on 

Behalf of Themselves and Others Similarly 

Situated, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

REXAM INC. and REXAM INC. PENSION 

AND BENEFITS COMMITTEE, 

 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 4:05-CV-05264-CW 

ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY 

APPROVAL AND SETTLEMENT 

HEARING 

 

Case 4:05-cv-05264-CW Document 153 Filed 05/03/07 Page 1 of 5
 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL AND SETTLEMENT HEARING 

2

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL 

AND SETTLEMENT HEARING 

The joint motion of the Settling Parties for an order preliminarily approving a class action 

settlement and setting a settlement hearing came on for hearing on or about May 3, 2007. The Court 

has considered the Stipulation Regarding Settlement of Class Action (and its exhibits), the 

submissions of counsel, and all other papers filed in this action. The matter having been submitted 

and good cause appearing therefore: 

The Court finds as follows: 

1. All defined terms contained herein shall have the same meanings as set forth in 

the Stipulation Regarding Settlement of Class Action executed by the Settling Parties and filed with 

this Court (the “Stipulation”); 

2. The Class Representatives and Rexam, through their counsel of record in the 

Litigation, have reached an agreement to settle all claims in the Litigation; 

3. By order dated September 20, 2006, the Court found that the Class (comprised of 

the two certified classes) meets the requirements for certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure: (a) the Class (each certified class) is ascertainable and so numerous that joinder 

of all members of the Class is impracticable; (b) there are questions of law or fact common to the 

Class (each certified class), and there is a well-defined community of interest among members of the 

Class (each certified class) with respect to the subject matter of the Litigation; (c) the claims of Class 

Representatives are typical of the claims of the members of the Class (members of their respective 

certified class); (d) the Class Representatives will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the 

Members of the Class; (e) a class action is superior to other available methods for an efficient 

adjudication of this controversy; and (f) the counsel of record for the Class Representatives is 

qualified to serve as counsel for the Class Representatives in their own capacities as well as their 

representative capacities and for the Class; 

4. The moving parties also have presented to the Court for review a Stipulation 

Regarding Settlement of Class Action. The Stipulation is within the range of reasonableness and 

meets the requirements for preliminary approval; and 

Case 4:05-cv-05264-CW Document 153 Filed 05/03/07 Page 2 of 5
 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL AND SETTLEMENT HEARING 

3

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

5. The moving parties have also presented to the Court for review a plan to provide 

notice to the proposed Class of the terms of the settlement and the options facing the Class including 

to be represented by counsel of their choosing or to object to the Settlement. The notice will be 

mailed to all Class Members at their Last Known Addresses. The notice plan proposed by the 

Settling Parties is the best practicable under the circumstances. 

Good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Stipulation of 

Settlement is preliminarily approved; 

2. Notice of the proposed settlement and the rights of Class Members shall be given 

by mailing of the Notice to Class Members Regarding Settlement of a Class Action by first class, 

postage prepaid, to all Class Members pursuant to the applicable provisions in the Stipulation. 

Rexam shall provide the Claims Administrator with the information necessary to conduct this 

mailing as set forth in the Stipulation; 

3. A hearing shall be held before this Court on September 6, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. to 

consider whether the settlement should be given final approval by the Court: 

(a) Written objections by Class Members to the proposed settlement will be 

considered if received by the Claims Administrator on or before the Notice Response Deadline; 

(b) At the Settlement Hearing, Class Members may be heard in opposition to the 

settlement if they have previously submitted a timely written objection; 

(c) Class Counsel and counsel for Rexam should be prepared at the hearing to 

respond to objections filed by Class Members and to provide other information as appropriate, 

bearing on whether or not the settlement should be approved; and 

4. In the event that the Effective Date occurs, the Settling Parties and all Class 

Members will be deemed to have forever released and discharged the Released Claims. In the event 

that the Effective Date does not occur for any reason whatsoever, the Stipulation shall be deemed 

null and void and shall have no effect whatsoever. 

Case 4:05-cv-05264-CW Document 153 Filed 05/03/07 Page 3 of 5
 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL AND SETTLEMENT HEARING 

4

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 5/3/07 

DATED: ______________________ ___________________________________ 

The Honorable Claudia Wilken 

United States District Judge 

Case 4:05-cv-05264-CW Document 153 Filed 05/03/07 Page 4 of 5
CHAR2\979054v1 5

Case 4:05-cv-05264-CW Document 153 Filed 05/03/07 Page 5 of 5