Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02748/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02748-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal

---

1

Case No. 14-CV-02748-LHK

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

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

SAN JOSE DIVISION

MICHELLE NARANJO and MATHAN 

JAYME,

 Plaintiffs,

vs.

BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL 

ASSOCIATION and DOES 1 through 10, 

inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No.: 5:14-CV-02748-LHK

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ 

MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 

APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION 

SETTLEMENT

Plaintiffs Michelle Naranjo and Mathan Jayme (collectively, “Plaintiffs” or “Class 

Representatives”) have made an application pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e) for entry of an 

order (a) preliminarily approving the settlement of this litigation pursuant to the amended Joint 

Stipulation of Class Action Settlement and Release (the “Agreement”), ECF Nos. 65 & 77; (b) 

conditionally certifying a class for purposes of proceedings in connection with the final approval 

of the Agreement; (c) approving the amended form of Class Notice of Settlement and directing 

the manner of delivery thereof, ECF No. 77; (d) approving Larry W. Lee of Diversity Law 

Case 5:14-cv-02748-LHK Document 78 Filed 12/07/15 Page 1 of 6
2

Case No. 14-CV-02748-LHK

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

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

Group, Dennis S. Hyun of Hyun Legal, and William L. Marder of Polaris Law Group as Class 

Counsel and Plaintiffs as Class Representatives.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

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

Agreement executed by the Parties and filed with this Court.

2. The Agreement is PRELIMINARILY APPROVED as appearing on its face to be 

fair, reasonable, and adequate and to have been the product of arm’s-length negotiations between

the Plaintiff and Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant,”

“BANA,” or “Bank of America”). In making this preliminary finding, the Court considered the 

nature of the claims, the relative strength of the claims, the amounts and kinds of benefits paid in 

settlement, the allocation of settlement proceeds amongst the class members, and the fact that a 

settlement represents a compromise of the Parties’ respective positions rather than the result of a 

finding of liability at trial. 

3. For settlement purposes only, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and 23(b)(3), the 

Court conditionally certifies the following Class:

All persons whose employment with BANA ended in California from 

December 1, 2013 through August 31, 2015 (“226(e) Class Period”), and 

who received their final pay through a “cashier’s” or “manual” check.

4. If the Agreement does not become final for any reason, the fact that the Parties 

were willing to stipulate to class certification as part of the Agreement shall have no bearing on, 

and will not be admissible in connection with, the issue of whether a class in this action should 

be certified in a non-settlement context. The Court’s findings are for purposes of conditionally 

certifying a Settlement Class and will not have any claim, issue, evidentiary preclusion or 

estoppel effect in any other action against the Releasees, or in this Action if the Agreement is not 

finally approved. 

5. The Court finds preliminarily, and for purposes of proceeding pursuant to Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 23(e), that the number of class members is sufficiently numerous, the class members are 

Case 5:14-cv-02748-LHK Document 78 Filed 12/07/15 Page 2 of 6
3

Case No. 14-CV-02748-LHK

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

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

ascertainable based on the Defendant’s records, the Plaintiffs’ claims are common and typical of 

those of the class, and that there is adequate and fair representation.

6. Accordingly, for purposes of the Agreement only, this litigation is 

CONDITIONALLY CERTIFIED as a class action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e).

7. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g), the Court APPOINTS as Class Counsel for 

settlement purposes only Larry W. Lee of Diversity Law Group, Dennis S. Hyun of Hyun Legal,

and William L. Marder of Polaris Law Group. 

8. Plaintiffs are approved as Class Representatives for the Settlement Class

Members for settlement purposes only.

9. The Court finds on a preliminary basis that the proposed settlement described in 

the Agreement (including the monetary provisions, the plan of allocation, the release of claims, 

the proposed award of attorney’s fees and costs and the Class Representative Service Payment) 

falls within the “range of reasonableness” and therefore grants preliminary approval of the 

Agreement. Based on a review of the record, the Court finds that the Agreement is the result of 

arms-length negotiations conducted after Class Counsel had adequately investigated the claims 

and became familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of those claims. 

10. The Court APPROVES Rust Consulting as Claims Administrator for the purposes 

of this settlement.

11. A hearing (the “Final Approval Hearing”) is scheduled to be held before the Court 

on May 5, 2016, at 1:30 p.m., for the following purposes:

a. to determine finally whether this litigation satisfies the applicable 

prerequisites for class action treatment of a settlement class;

b. to determine whether the proposed Agreement is fair, reasonable, and 

adequate and should be granted final approval by the Court;

c. to determine whether the Order of Final Approval as provided under the 

Agreement should be entered, and to determine whether the Releasees 

should be released of and from the Released Claims as provided in the 

Case 5:14-cv-02748-LHK Document 78 Filed 12/07/15 Page 3 of 6
4

Case No. 14-CV-02748-LHK

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

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

Agreement;

d. to determine whether the proposed plan of allocation of the Settlement 

Amount is fair and reasonable and should be approved by the Court;

e. to finally consider Plaintiffs’ application for Class Representative 

enhancement payments;

f. to finally determine whether Class Counsel’s application for an award of 

attorney’s fees and costs is fair, reasonable, and adequate and should be 

approved by the Court;

g. to determine that the Claim’s Administrator’s costs should be paid from 

the Settlement Amount; and

h. to rule upon such other matters as the Court may deem appropriate.

12. The form of Class Notice as amended by the parties is hereby APPROVED. ECF 

No. 77. No later than 20 calendar days after the entry of this Order, Defendant shall provide the 

Claims Administrator with each Class Member’s: (1) name; (2) last known address and 

telephone number; (3) Social Security number; and (4) the date of the termination of their 

employment. No later than 20 calendar days after receipt of this information from Defendant, 

the Claims Administrator shall send the documents constituting the Notice Packet to each Class 

Member by first-class mail, postage prepaid.

13. The Court finds that the amended Class Notice, ECF No. 77, along with the 

related notification materials, constitute the best notice practicable under the circumstances and 

are in full compliance with the laws of the State of California, the United States Constitution, and 

the requirements of due process. The Court further finds that the notifications fully and 

accurately informs the Settlement Class Members of all material elements of the proposed 

settlement, of the Settlement Class Members’ right to dispute their share of the settlement, of the 

Settlement Class Members’ right to be excluded from the Settlement Class, and of each 

Settlement Class Member’s right and opportunity to object to the settlement.

14. The Court APPROVES the proposed Response Deadline of 45 calendar days 

Case 5:14-cv-02748-LHK Document 78 Filed 12/07/15 Page 4 of 6
5

Case No. 14-CV-02748-LHK

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

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

from the initial mailing of the Notice Packet.

15. The Court APPROVES the proposed procedure for opting out of the Settlement 

Class. The date of the postmark on the return-mailing envelope shall be the exclusive means 

used to determine whether a request for exclusion has been timely submitted. Any member of 

the Class who requests exclusion from the settlement will not be entitled to any share of the 

settlement and will not be bound by the Agreement or have any right to object, appeal, or 

comment thereon. Members of the Class who fail to submit a valid and timely request for 

exclusion shall be bound by all terms of the Agreement and the Order and Final Judgment, 

regardless of whether they otherwise have requested exclusion from the settlement.

16. All reasonable costs of settlement and claims administration, including the 

mailing of the amended Class Notice, shall be paid for as provided in the Agreement.

17. To object, a Class Member must mail a Notice of Objection to the Claims 

Administrator no later than 14 calendar days before the original date scheduled for the hearing 

regarding final approval of the settlement. The Notice of Objection must be signed by the Class 

Member and contain all information required by the Settlement Agreement. The postmark date 

of the mailing shall be deemed the exclusive means for determining that the Notice of Objection 

is timely. Class Members who fail to object in the manner specified above shall be deemed to 

have waived all objections to the Settlement. Class Members who timely mail their objections

may appear at the Final Approval Hearing to have their objections heard by the Court. 

18. The schedule by which the events referenced above shall occur is as follows: 

Event Date

Submission by Defendant of Class Members’ 

Information 

December 28, 2015

Amended Notice Mailed to Class Members January 19, 2016

Motions for Attorney’s Fees and Costs; Motions for 

Service Awards

February 19, 2016

Deadline to Opt-Out March 4, 2016

Case 5:14-cv-02748-LHK Document 78 Filed 12/07/15 Page 5 of 6
6

Case No. 14-CV-02748-LHK

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

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

Motion for Final Approval April 8, 2016

Deadline to Object April 21, 2016

Claims Administrator Affidavit of Compliance with 

Notice Requirements

April 28, 2016

Replies in Support of Motions for Final Approval, 

Attorney’s Fees and Costs, and Service Awards

April 28, 2016

Final Approval Hearing May 5, 2016, at 1:30 p.m.

19. Pending further order of this Court, all proceedings in this matter except those 

contemplated herein and as part of the settlement are stayed.

20. All Parties are otherwise ordered to comply with the terms of the Agreement.

21. The Agreement resolves the First and Fifth Causes of Action on a class or 

representative basis, as set forth in the Second Amended Complaint, as well as Plaintiffs’ 

individual claims as alleged in the Second through Fourth Causes of Action in the Second 

Amended Complaint.

22. Jurisdiction by this Court is retained over this litigation and the Parties to this

litigation, and each of the Class Members for all matters relating to this litigation, the 

Agreement, including (without limitation) all matters relating to the administration, 

interpretation, effectuation, and/or enforcement of the Agreement and this Order.

Dated: December 7, 2015

____________________________________

Lucy H. Koh

United States District Judge

Case 5:14-cv-02748-LHK Document 78 Filed 12/07/15 Page 6 of 6