Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-04918/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-04918-4/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 

 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER

CASE NO. C 08-04918 JF 

BLUMENTHAL, NORDREHAUG & BHOWMIK 

Norman B. Blumenthal (STATE BAR NO. 068687) 

Kyle R. Nordrehaug (STATE BAR NO. 205975) 

Aparajit Bhowmik (STATE BAR NO. 248066) 

2255 Calle Clara 

La Jolla, CA 92037 

Telephone: (858)551-1223 

Facsimile: (858) 551-1232 

UNITED EMPLOYEES LAW GROUP 

Walter Haines (STATE BAR NO. 071705) 

65 Pine Ave, #312 

Long Beach, CA 90802 

Telephone: (562) 256-1047 

Facsimile: (562) 256-1006 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

DAVID WALSH and DAVID KALUA 

. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DAVID WALSH, an individual, DAVID 

KALUA, an individual, on behalf of themselves, 

and on behalf of all persons similarly situated, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

APPLE INC., 

Defendant. 

Case No. C 08-04918 JF 

[PROPOSED] ORDER AWARDING 

ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND 

LITIGATION EXPENSES TO 

CLASS COUNSEL 

Judge: Hon. Jeremy Fogel 

Court: Dept. 3 

Action Filed: August 4, 2008 

**E-Filed 7/23/2010**

____________

____________

Case 5:08-cv-04918-JF Document 47 Filed 07/23/10 Page 1 of 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 

- 2 - [PROPOSED] ORDER

CASE NO. C 08-04918 JF

 This matter having come before the Court for hearing, pursuant to the order of this Court 

dated February 26, 2010, on the application of Plaintiffs for consideration of approval of the 

settlement and for consideration of the award of attorneys fees and costs. Due and adequate 

notice having been given to the Class as required in said order, and the Court having considered 

all papers filed and proceedings had herein and otherwise being fully informed of the premises 

and good cause appearing therefor, it is 

HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

 1. The Court determines that an award of attorneys’ fees and costs to class 

counsel under the common fund doctrine in the collective amount of $247,500.00, representing 

25% of the $990,000.00 settlement value to the Class, is fair, reasonable and appropriate. 

Counsel for the Class performed work which benefitted the Class and expended substantial time 

and effort in litigating this matter. Class Counsel requests as award of attorneys’ fees in the 

amount of $213,452.86, which correlates to 21.5% of the Settlement Fund. An award of 

attorney’s fees in this amount compares favorable to the accepted benchmark of attorney’s fees 

awards in common fund cases. 

 2. The substantial recovery obtained and the results achieved, along with the 

risks of the litigation, the skill required, quality of the work, the contingent nature of the fee, the 

financial burden carried by Class Counsel, and awards made in similar cases, all justify the 

requested attorneys’ fee and cost award. The work of class counsel on behalf of the Class 

resulted in the creation of a common fund with a total settlement value of $990,000.00, with no 

reversion to Defendant. 

 3. Class counsel prosecuted this case on a contingent basis. The Court finds that 

there is a substantial difference between the risk assumed by attorneys being paid by the hour and 

attorneys working on a contingent fee basis. The attorney being paid by the hour can go to the 

bank with his fee. The attorney working on a contingent basis can only log hours while working 

without pay towards a result that will hopefully entitle him to a market place contingent fee 

Case 5:08-cv-04918-JF Document 47 Filed 07/23/10 Page 2 of 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 

- 3 - [PROPOSED] ORDER

CASE NO. C 08-04918 JF

taking into account the risk of the undertaking. Otherwise, the contingent fee attorney receives 

nothing. Class Counsel subjected themselves to this contingent fee market risk in this all or 

nothing contingent fee case wherein the necessity and financial burden of private enforcement 

makes the requested award of one-third of the settlement value to the Class appropriate. 

 4. At the time this case was brought, the result was far from certain. The 

Defendant’s practice at issue here had been in place for years and Defendant’s numerous defenses 

to the case created difficulties with proof and novel legal issues for class counsel to overcome. 

The very substantial risks of this litigation could have resulted in the Class receiving nothing if 

the claims were litigated. 

 5. In prosecuting this action, Class Counsel displayed the exemplary skill and 

expertise that is necessary to successfully prosecute this wage and hour class action which 

involved novel and difficult issues. In opposing the capable firm of Orrick, Herrington & 

Sutcliffe, LLP on a contingent fee basis, class counsel had to forego other employment on other 

cases so as to devote the necessary time and resources to this case. 

 6. The Declaration of Blumenthal represents that Class Counsel’s total lodestar in 

this litigation as of June 9, 2010 is $205,098.75. As a result, the requested fee award is roughly 

equivalent to the total lodestar, and therefore, the lodestar cross-check confirms the 

reasonableness of the requested fee award. 

 7. The Court finds that the named Plaintiffs performed their duties and roles as the 

class representatives admirably. The Court hereby awards the two named Plaintiffs an incentive 

and service award of $10,000 each, which the Court finds to be fair and reasonable, to be paid in 

accordance with the Settlement Agreement. 

 8. The Court further finds that Plaintiffs incurred expenses in the amount of 

$34,047.14 on behalf of the Class in the prosecution of this action. These costs and expenses 

were reasonably necessary in the prosecution of the matter, and therefore, the Court awards class 

counsel $34,047.14 for reimbursement of costs and expenses. 

____________

Case 5:08-cv-04918-JF Document 47 Filed 07/23/10 Page 3 of 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 

- 4 - [PROPOSED] ORDER

CASE NO. C 08-04918 JF

 9. For all of the above reasons, the Court hereby awards $247,500.00 to 

Class Counsel as attorneys’ fees, consisting of $34,047.14 for litigation expenses and 

$213,452.86 for attorneys’ fees, to be paid in accordance with the terms of the Stipulation and 

Settlement Agreement. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: ___________________ _______________________________________ 

 Hon. Jeremy Fogel 

 Judge, U.S. District Court 

7/23/2010

____________

Case 5:08-cv-04918-JF Document 47 Filed 07/23/10 Page 4 of 4