Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01889/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01889-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201 Fair Labor Standards Act

---

United States District Court

Northern District of California

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JOSE MEZA,

Plaintiff,

v.

S.S. SKIKOS, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-01889-TEH 

ORDER GRANTING 

PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF 

SETTLEMENT

This matter came before the Court on February 22, 2016 for a hearing on Plaintiff’s 

unopposed motion for preliminary approval of settlement. (Docket No. 45.) Having 

considered the Stipulation of Settlement and Release (“Settlement Stipulation”), Notice 

Packet, documents filed in support of the instant motion, and statements of counsel, the 

Court HEREBY ORDERS THE FOLLOWING:1

1. The Court GRANTS preliminary approval of the terms and conditions 

contained in the Settlement Stipulation, attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Court 

preliminarily finds that the terms of the Settlement Stipulation appear to be within the 

range of possible approval, as they are fair, adequate and reasonable, and therefore comply 

with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e). 

2. The Court preliminarily appoints Plaintiff, Jose Meza, as the class 

representative.

3. The Court preliminarily appoints Schneider Wallace Cottrell Konecky 

Wotkyns LLP and Villegas Carrera, LLP, as Class Counsel. 

4. The Court GRANTS conditional certification of the California Class for 

settlement purposes. The “California Class” is defined to mean “all current and former 

Drivers employed by Defendants in California during the California Class Period.” The 

 

1 Unless otherwise noted, capitalized terms in this Order shall have the same meaning 

as in the Settlement Stipulation. 

Case 3:15-cv-01889-TEH Document 48 Filed 02/24/16 Page 1 of 6
United States District Court

Northern District of California

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

“California Class Period” is the period beginning April 27, 2011 through the date of this 

Order.

5. The Court GRANTS conditional certification of the California FLSA Class 

for settlement purposes. The “California FLSA Class” is defined as “all current and 

former Drivers who were employed by Defendants in California during the California 

FLSA Class Period.” The “California FLSA Class Period” is the period beginning April 

27, 2012 through the date of this Order. 

6. The Court finds that, for settlement purposes, the above-defined Classes 

meet all of the requirements for class certification. The Court further finds that the 

requirements of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3) are satisfied and that: 

(a) the above-defined Classes are ascertainable; (b) the Class Members are so numerous 

that joinder is impracticable; (c) there are questions of law and fact common to the Class 

Members which predominate over any individual questions; (d) Plaintiff’s claims are 

typical of the claims of the Class Members; (e) Plaintiff and Class Counsel have fairly, 

adequately, reasonably and competently represented and protected the interests of the 

Classes throughout the litigation; and (f) a class action is superior to other available 

methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy. 

7. The Court preliminarily finds that the Settlement is the product of serious, 

informed, non-collusive negotiations conducted at arms-length by the parties and with the 

assistance of mediator David Rotman. In making these preliminary findings, the Court 

considered, among other factors, the potential statutory damages claimed in the lawsuit on 

behalf of Plaintiff and the Class Members, Defendant’s potential liability, the risks of 

continued litigation including trial outcome, delay and potential appeals, and the 

substantial benefits available to Class Members as a result of the Settlement. The Court 

further preliminarily finds that the terms of the Settlement have no obvious deficiencies 

and do not improperly grant preferential treatment to any individual Class Member.

8. The Court preliminarily appoints Simpluris, Inc. as the Settlement 

Administrator. 

Case 3:15-cv-01889-TEH Document 48 Filed 02/24/16 Page 2 of 6
United States District Court

Northern District of California

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

9. The Court APPROVES the Notice Packet attached to the Settlement 

Stipulation as Exhibits 1-3. See Ex. 1 to Prelim. Approval Mot. (Docket No. 45). The 

Court finds that the Notice Packet, along with the related notification procedure 

contemplated by the Settlement, constitutes the best notice practicable under the 

circumstances and is in full compliance with the applicable laws and the requirements of 

due process. The Court further finds that the Notice Packet appears to fully and accurately 

inform the Class Members of all material elements of the proposed Settlement, of their 

right to be excluded from the Settlement, and of their right and opportunity to object to the 

Settlement. Subject to the terms of the Settlement Stipulation, including the terms 

pertaining to address verification, the Notice Packet shall be mailed via first-class mail to 

the most recent known address of each Class Member within the timeframe specified in the 

Settlement Stipulation and Paragraph 16B of this Order. Each Class Member shall receive 

the Notice Packet in both English and Spanish. The Parties are authorized to make nonsubstantive changes to the proposed Notice Packet that are consistent with the terms of the 

Settlement Stipulation and this Order.

10. The Court APPROVES the proposed procedure for Class Members to 

request exclusion from the Settlement, which is to submit an Exclusion Letter to the 

Settlement Administrator no later than 45 days after the Notice Packet is mailed, or, for 

Class Members whose Notice Packets are remailed, the later of 45 days after the original 

mailing or 7 days after the remailing to that Class Member. Any putative Class Member 

who submits an Exclusion Letter shall not be a Member of the Class, shall be barred from 

participating in the Settlement, and shall receive no benefit from the Settlement. 

11. The Court APPROVES the proposed procedure for Class Members to opt in 

to the California FLSA Class, and finds that the procedure complies with 29 U.S.C. § 

216(b). 

12. The Court APPROVES the proposed procedure for Class Members to object 

to the Settlement, which is to submit an objection to the Court by mail to the Class Action 

Clerk or by filing with the Court postmarked no later than 45 days after the Notice Packet 

Case 3:15-cv-01889-TEH Document 48 Filed 02/24/16 Page 3 of 6
United States District Court

Northern District of California

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

is mailed, or, for Class Members whose Notice Packets are remailed, the later of 45 days 

after the original mailing or 7 days after the remailing to that Class Member. 

13. The Court ORDERS that Class Counsel shall file a motion for approval of 

the Fee and Expense Award and the Service Payment, with the appropriate declarations 

and supporting evidence, at least 14 days prior to the close of the Class Notice period to be 

heard at the same time as the motion for Final Approval of the Settlement. 

14. The Court ORDERS that Class Counsel shall file a motion for Final 

Approval of the Settlement, with the appropriate declarations and supporting evidence, 

including a declaration setting forth the identity of any Class Members who request 

exclusion from the Settlement, by Monday, May 2, 2016. 

15. Each Class Member shall be given a full opportunity to object to the 

proposed Settlement, request for attorneys’ fees, and service payment, and to participate at 

the Final Approval Hearing, which the Court sets to commence on Monday, May 23, 

2016 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor of the Phillip Burton Federal Courthouse in 

San Francisco. Any Class Member seeking to object to the proposed Settlement may file 

such objection in writing through the process described in the Notice Packet or may appear 

at the Final Approval Hearing to make the objection. 

16. The Court APPROVES and adopts the following dates and deadlines: 

A. Defendant shall provide to the Settlement Administrator a database 

containing Class Members’ contact information no later than 5 business days after 

the date of this Order.2

B. The Settlement Administrator shall mail Notice Packets no later than 

10 days after receiving the Class Members’ contact information from Defendant.

C. Class Counsel shall file its motion for attorney’s fees and costs 31 

days after the Settlement Administrator mails the Notice Packets. 

 

2

The parties agreed at the February 22, 2016 hearing to change this deadline from 5 

calendar days to 5 business days. Thus, this term differs slightly from the Settlement 

Stipulation. Unless otherwise indicated, all other references to “days” are “calendar days.”

Case 3:15-cv-01889-TEH Document 48 Filed 02/24/16 Page 4 of 6
United States District Court

Northern District of California

5

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

D. Class Members must postmark requests to opt out, objections, or 

disputes concerning the information in the Notice Packet no later than 45 days after 

the Notice Packet is mailed, or, for Class Members whose Notice Packets are 

remailed, the later of 45 days after the original mailing or 7 days after remailing to 

that Class Member.

E. The Settlement Administrator shall notify the parties of the number of 

Exclusion Letters received no later than 2 days after the opt out deadline (Paragraph 

16D, above).

F. Defendant may void the Settlement if more than 10% of the California 

Class Members opt out, and if desired, must do so no later than 7 days after the 

Settlement Administrator notifies the parties of the number of Exclusion Letters 

received.

G. The Settlement Administrator shall provide a declaration of due 

diligence and proof of mailing of the Notice Packet no later than 7 days before the 

Final Approval Hearing. 

H. Class Counsel shall provide a draft of the Final Approval motion to 

Defense Counsel for review no later than 2 days prior to the filing date of the Final 

Approval motion (Paragraph 14, above). 

I. Class Counsel shall file the Settlement Administrator’s verification 

that the notice process has been completed on or before the date of the Final 

Approval Hearing. 

J. The Final Approval Hearing shall be held on Monday, May 23, 2016.

K. The Payment Obligation and Class Release Date shall be: 

(a) the date when the Final Approval Order is signed, if there 

are no objectors, or

(b) in the event there are objectors, thirty-two days after service 

of notice of entry of the Final Approval Order and Judgment on the 

Parties and all objectors to the Settlement, if no appeals or requests for 

Case 3:15-cv-01889-TEH Document 48 Filed 02/24/16 Page 5 of 6
United States District Court

Northern District of California

6

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

review have been taken, or 

(c) the issue date of orders affirming the Final Approval Order 

and Judgment or denying review after exhaustion of all appellate 

remedies, if appeals or requests for review have been taken. 

L. Defendant shall provide the Settlement Funds to the Settlement 

Administrator no later than 3 business days after the Payment Obligation and Class 

Release Date (Paragraph 16K, above). 

M. The Settlement Administrator shall mail or wire all required payments 

no later than 14 days after the Payment Obligation and Class Release Date 

(Paragraph 16K, above). 

N. Class Members shall cash their Individual Settlement Payment checks 

no later than 180 days after the checks are mailed or wired (Paragraph 16M, above). 

 17. The Court ORDERS that, pending further order of this Court, all proceedings 

in this lawsuit, except those contemplated herein and in the Settlement Stipulation, are 

stayed. 

18. If for any reason the Court does not execute and file a Final Approval Order 

and Judgment, the proposed Settlement subject to this Order and all evidence and 

proceedings had in connection with the Settlement shall be null and void. 

19. The Court may extend any of the deadlines set forth in this Order or adjourn 

or continue the Final Approval Hearing without further notice to the Classes. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 02/24/16 _____________________________________ 

THELTON E. HENDERSON 

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-01889-TEH Document 48 Filed 02/24/16 Page 6 of 6