Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06493/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06493-26/pdf.json

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

---

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 

Case No. C-06-6493 WHA 

 

[PROPOSED] ORDER FINALLY APPROVING SECOND 

AMENDED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL 

JUDGMENT 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MADHAV KAKANI, GENNADY 

BRIN, and RANJIV JAIN, on behalf of 

themselves and all others similarly 

situated, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

ORACLE CORPORATION, 

Defendant. 

CASE NO. C-06-6493 WHA 

CLASS ACTION

[PROPOSED] ORDER FINALLY 

APPROVING SECOND AMENDED 

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND 

FINAL JUDGMENT 

The Hon. Judge William H. Alsup

Case 3:06-cv-06493-WHA Document 133 Filed 01/14/08 Page 1 of 7
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 

Case No. C-06-6493 WHA -2- [PROPOSED] ORDER FINALLY APPROVING SECOND 

AMENDED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL 

JUDGMENT

On December 20, 2007, the Court held a hearing pursuant to notice on the Joint 

Motion of the Parties for Order Finally Approving Class Action Settlement and Motion of 

Plaintiffs for Order Approving Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. This action alleged 

past misclassification of sales consultants as exempt, unpaid wages and unpaid overtime, 

and other damages, penalties and interest due under various California laws and under the 

Fair Labor Standards Act. Todd Schneider of Schneider & Wallace and Christina 

Djernaes of Law Office of Christina Djernaes appeared for Plaintiffs, and Nancy L. Abell 

of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP appeared for Defendant Oracle Corporation. 

The Parties submitted their Second Amended Settlement Agreement (“Settlement 

Agreement”), which this Court preliminarily approved in its August 2, 2007 Order. In 

accordance with the preliminary approval Order, Class Members have been given notice 

of the terms of that Settlement Agreement and the opportunity to object to it or to exclude 

themselves from its provisions. 

Having received and considered the proposed Settlement Agreement, the motions, 

declarations and other supporting papers filed by the parties, the declarations of the 

Claims Administrator, and the evidence and argument received by the Court at the 

preliminary approval hearings held on June 19 and July 5, 2007, and the final approval 

hearing on December 20, 2007, the Court GRANTS final approval to the Settlement 

Agreement, and HEREBY ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES as follows: 

1. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action, the 

Plaintiffs, the Defendant and those Settlement Class Members listed in Appendices A, B 

and C of the Supplemental Declaration of Hank Willson in Support of Motion for Order 

Finally Approving Class Action Settlement (“Supplemental Willson Decl.”), filed January 

10, 2008. 

2. Pursuant to this Court’s Orders of August 2 and 16, 2007, a Notice of Class 

Action Settlement, Claim, Waiver, Release and Consent to Sue Form, and Notice of 

Objection were sent to each Settlement Class Member by first-class mail and also sent to 

those Settlement Class Members who were current employees of Oracle Corporation or 

Case 3:06-cv-06493-WHA Document 133 Filed 01/14/08 Page 2 of 7
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 

Case No. C-06-6493 WHA -3- [PROPOSED] ORDER FINALLY APPROVING SECOND 

AMENDED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL 

JUDGMENT

one of its subsidiary or affiliated companies by email and Company mail. These papers 

informed Settlement Class Members of the terms of the Settlement, their right to object to 

the Settlement or to elect not to participate in the Settlement and pursue their own 

remedies, and their right to appear in person or by counsel at the final approval hearing 

and be heard regarding approval of the Settlement. Adequate periods of time were 

provided by each of these procedures. 

3. The Court finds and determines that this notice procedure afforded adequate 

protections to Settlement Class Members and provides the basis for the Court to make an 

informed decision regarding approval of the Settlement Agreement based on the responses 

of those Class Members. The Court finds and determines that the notice provided in this 

case was the best notice practicable, and satisfied the requirements of law and due 

process. 

4. In addition, pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1715 (“CAFA”), the Attorney General of the United States and the appropriate state 

official in each state in which a Settlement Class Member resides have been given notice 

of the Settlement. As set forth in the Declaration of Nancy L. Abell Re CAFA Notices 

filed January 10, 2008, pursuant to CAFA, on June 8, 2007, not later than 10 days after 

the motion seeking preliminary approval of the Settlement Agreement was filed in this 

Court, counsel for Defendant served upon the Attorney General and the appropriate state 

official of each state in which Defendant believed each Settlement Class Member resided 

a copy of the Complaint, notice that the preliminary approval hearing was then scheduled 

for June 21, 2007, and a copy of the Settlement Agreement and its attachments, including 

the proposed notice of class action settlement and right to object, request exclusion from 

the class or otherwise comment on the fairness of the settlement, the claim form and the 

notice of objection to settlement. Counsel for Defendant gave amended notice with 

attachments on June 16, 2007 to the same recipients because the Court changed the date of 

the hearing from June 21 to June 19, 2007. On August 31, 2007, counsel for Defendant 

gave notice to the same officials of the Court’s preliminary approval order and of the final 

Case 3:06-cv-06493-WHA Document 133 Filed 01/14/08 Page 3 of 7
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 

Case No. C-06-6493 WHA -4- [PROPOSED] ORDER FINALLY APPROVING SECOND 

AMENDED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL 

JUDGMENT

approval hearing set for December 20, 2007, and attached thereto the Complaint; the 

Settlement Agreement and its attachments, including the proposed notice of class action 

settlement and right to object, request exclusion from the class or otherwise comment on 

the fairness of the Settlement, the claim form and the notice of objection to settlement; 

and a list of the names of the Settlement Class Members who resided in the particular state 

and their estimated proportionate share of the settlement. That August 31 updated notice 

was sent more than 90 days before the December 20, 2007 hearing on final approval. 

5. The Court finds and determines that Defendant’s notice of Settlement was 

timely, adequate, and compliant with the statutory requirements of CAFA. Accordingly, 

28 U.S.C. section 1715(e) has no application to the Settlement. 

6. Of the 1,174 Settlement Class Members, twelve class members filed written 

objections (seven timely, and five untimely) to the proposed Settlement as part of this 

notice process. Only one of these objections raised any substantive issue with any aspect 

of the Settlement; that objection expressed a belief that fees should not be awarded to 

Class Counsel because relief for Settlement Class Members was available through the 

government. No objector or representative of an objector appeared at the final approval 

hearing. 

7. Of the 1,174 Settlement Class Members, only seven opted out of the 

Settlement (six in a timely fashion, one untimely). 

8. For the reasons stated in the Court’s August 2, 2007, preliminary approval 

order, the Court finds and determines that the proposed Settlement Class, as defined in the 

definitions section of the Settlement Agreement, meets all of the legal requirements for 

class certification, and therefore, it is hereby ordered that the Settlement Class is finally 

approved and certified as a class for purposes of settlement of this action. 

9. The Court finds and determines that the terms of the Settlement Agreement 

are fair, reasonable and adequate to the class and to each Class Member. 

10. The Eligible Class Members listed in Appendix A to the Supplemental 

Willson Decl. will be bound by the release described in the Second Amended Settlement 

Case 3:06-cv-06493-WHA Document 133 Filed 01/14/08 Page 4 of 7
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 

Case No. C-06-6493 WHA -5- [PROPOSED] ORDER FINALLY APPROVING SECOND 

AMENDED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL 

JUDGMENT

Agreement at ¶2.s. (Settled Claims under California Law) and ¶2.t. (Settled Claims under 

the Fair Labor Standards Act); the Eligible Class Members listed in Appendix B to the 

Supplemental Willson Decl. will be bound by the release described in the Second 

Amended Settlement Agreement at 2.s. (Settled Claims under California Law); and the 

Eligible Class Members listed in Appendix C to the Supplemental Willson Decl. will be 

bound by the release described in the Second Amended Settlement Agreement at ¶2.t. 

(Settled Claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act). The Named Plaintiffs will be bound 

by the release described in the Second Amended Settlement Agreement at ¶2.c. 

11. The Court orders that the Joint Motion of the Parties for Order Finally 

Approving Class Action Settlement is GRANTED, that the Settlement Agreement is 

ordered finally approved, and that all terms and provisions of the Settlement Agreement 

should be and hereby are ordered to be consummated except as modified by this Order. 

12. The Court finds and determines that the payments to be made to the 

Settlement Class Members as provided for in the Settlement Agreement are fair and 

reasonable. 

13. The Court hereby gives final approval to, and orders upon the Effective 

Date as defined in Section 2.k. of the Settlement Agreement the following distribution of 

the $8,950,000 settlement fund that Defendant deposited with the Claims Administrator: 

(a) $6,763,802.01 to the Settlement Class Members who submitted valid 

Claim Forms by November 30, 2007 at noon Pacific time in accordance with the terms of 

the Settlement Agreement;

(b) $664,000 to Class Counsel for attorneys’ fees; 

(c) $75,000 in costs of suit to Class Counsel; 

(d) $1,382,197.99 reversion to Defendant Oracle Corporation, 

representing the proportion of the settlement attributable to those who opted out and those 

who did not file claims; and 

(e) $65,000 in fees and costs to the Claims Administrator. 

Case 3:06-cv-06493-WHA Document 133 Filed 01/14/08 Page 5 of 7
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 

Case No. C-06-6493 WHA -6- [PROPOSED] ORDER FINALLY APPROVING SECOND 

AMENDED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL 

JUDGMENT

14. Interest accrued on the $8,950,000 deposit shall be distributed on a pro rata 

basis to the recipients of the awards in paragraph 13. 

15. The Court finds and determines that the payment of the Class Counsel’s 

attorneys’ fees of $664,000 and costs of suit of $75,000 to Class Counsel of record are fair 

and reasonable. 

16. Pursuant to California Labor Code Section 2699(l), the Court acknowledges 

the payment by Oracle of $15,000 to the California Labor Development and Workforce 

Agency, which payment will not be made from the Funds Available for Settlement. 

Oracle, not the Claims Administrator, will make that payment pursuant to the terms of the 

Settlement Agreement. 

17. The objections to the Class Action Settlement, which are attached as Exhibit 

B to the Declaration of Kathy Y. Dales, filed December 4, 2007, are OVERRULED. 

18. Neither the Final Judgment nor the Settlement shall constitute an admission 

by Defendant of any liability or wrongdoing whatsoever, nor is the Final Judgment a 

finding of the validity or invalidity of any claims in the action or a finding of wrongdoing 

by Defendant herein. 

19. Without affecting the finality of this Final Judgment in any way, the Court 

reserves continuing jurisdiction over the action and the Parties for purposes of supervising 

the implementation, enforcement, construction, administration and effectuation of this 

Order and the Settlement Agreement as modified by this Order. 

20. Nothing in this Order shall preclude any action to enforce the Parties’ 

obligations under the Settlement Agreement or under this Order, including the 

requirement that the Claims Administrator make payments to the Class Members in 

accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement. 

21. Upon completion of administration of the Settlement, the Claims 

Administrator will provide written certification of such completion to the Court and 

counsel for the Parties. 

Case 3:06-cv-06493-WHA Document 133 Filed 01/14/08 Page 6 of 7
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 

Case No. C-06-6493 WHA -7- [PROPOSED] ORDER FINALLY APPROVING SECOND 

AMENDED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL 

JUDGMENT

22. The Parties are hereby ordered to consummate the Settlement Agreement in 

accordance with its terms except as amended by this Order. 

23. Each side is to bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees except as provided by 

this Order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED. 

DATED: 

 The Hon. William H. Alsup 

United States District Judge 

AGREED TO AND SUBMITTED BY COUNSEL: 

DATED: January 10, 2008 TODD M. SCHNEIDER 

W.H. “HANK” WILLSON, IV 

RACHEL E. BRILL 

SCHNEIDER & WALLACE 

By: /s/ Hank Willson

Hank Willson 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

MADHAV KAKANI, GENNADY BRIN, RANJIV 

JAIN AND THE PUTATIVE CLASS 

DATED: January 10, 2008 NANCY L. ABELL 

CYNTHIA J. EMRY 

ELIZABETH A. BROWN 

PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP 

By: /s/ Nancy Abell

Nancy L. Abell 

Attorneys for Defendant 

ORACLE CORPORATION 

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge William Alsup

January 14, 2008.

Case 3:06-cv-06493-WHA Document 133 Filed 01/14/08 Page 7 of 7