Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-05914/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-05914-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMIE MADRIGAL MENDEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

C-TWO GROUP, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-05914-HSG 

ORDER DENYING STIPULATION 

REGARDING PROPOSED CLASS 

NOTICE PLAN AND DIRECTING AN 

AMENDED STIPULATION

Re: Dkt. No. 93

Before the Court is the stipulation setting forth the proposed class notice plan filed by 

Plaintiff Jamie Mendez (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants C-Two Group, Inc. and C & L Associates, 

Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”). Dkt. No. 93 (“Stip.”). The Court has carefully considered the 

proposed notice plan and hereby DENIES the stipulation and DIRECTS the parties to file an 

amended stipulation and proposed notice plan that is drafted in light of the comments below.

“[Federal] Rule [of Civil Procedure] 23(d) gives district courts the power to regulate the 

notice and opt-out processes[.]” Wang v. Chinese Daily News, Inc., 623 F.3d 743, 756 (9th Cir. 

2010), vacated on other grounds by Chinese Daily News, Inc. v. Wang, 132 S. Ct. 74 (2011); Fed 

R. Civ. P. 23(d) (“[T]he court may issue orders that . . . deal with [Rule 23] procedural matters.”).

The parties’ proposed notice program provides for notice to the class by email. Stip. ¶ 5.c. 

The proposed notice program further provides that requests for exclusion from the class “shall be 

addressed to the Court [courtesy of] the Notice Administrator [at a mailing address.]” Id. ¶ 5.f. 

Class members are not provided with any opt-out form, but instead must create their own form 

that must include: “(1) the name of this lawsuit Mendez v. C-Two Group, Inc., et al., Case No. 13-

cv-05914-HSG; (2) the Class member's full name and current address; (3) a clear statement of the 

intention to opt out of the Class, such as ‘I wish to be excluded from the Class’; and (4) the Class 

member's signature[.]” Id. ¶ 6. 

Case 4:13-cv-05914-HSG Document 95 Filed 12/28/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

The Court finds that the following changes to the parties’ proposed method for submitting 

requests for exclusion are required. Class members must be provided with a standard opt-out form 

that is attached to the notice email along with the class notice, which itself should be amended to 

reflect the inclusion of an opt-out form. Under no circumstances should the opt-out form (or any 

other comment form) be addressed to the Court, even if only “courtesy of” the class administrator. 

Under this approach, the Court may well receive some communications from the class that are 

appropriately addressed to the class administrator.

Finally, in their amended stipulation, the parties should explain their plan for providing 

notice to those class members for whom the initial email notice “bounces back” as undeliverable. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 28, 2015

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 4:13-cv-05914-HSG Document 95 Filed 12/28/15 Page 2 of 2