Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-02162/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-02162-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1331fl Fed. Question: Fair Labor Standards

---

1

16-CV-2162 JLS (NLS)

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EDUARDO NUNEZ, individually and on 

behalf of others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

BAE SYSTEMS SAN DIEGO SHIP 

REPAIR INC., a California Corporation; 

and DOES 1 through 50 inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No.: 16-CV-2162 JLS (NLS)

ORDER (1) ACCEPTING 

PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL 

NOTICE; (2) DIRECTING 

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE TO THE

CLASS; AND (3) SETTING A NEW 

DATE FOR THE FINAL FAIRNESS 

HEARING

(ECF No. 58)

Presently before the Court is Class Counsel’s and Defendant BAE Systems San 

Diego Ship Repair, Inc.’s (collectively, the “Parties”) Joint Statement Regarding 

Supplemental Notice to the Settlement Class, (“Joint Statement”). (ECF No. 58.) The 

Parties have submitted this Joint Statement in accordance with the Court’s August 2, 2017 

Order, (ECF No. 57), which required the Parties to submit: (1) a statement confirming or 

denying their willingness to bear the costs of re-notifying the Class, and, if the Parties wish 

to do so, (2) a proposed supplemental notice incorporating the Court’s ruling; and (3) a 

/ / /

/ / /

Case 3:16-cv-02162-JLS-NLS Document 59 Filed 08/10/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 6
2

16-CV-2162 JLS (NLS)

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

proposed schedule and proposed procedures for the supplemental notice, including a new 

date for the Final Fairness Hearing. (Joint Statement 2;

1

see also ECF No. 57.)

As an initial matter, the Parties “agree to assume the additional cost for the 

administration of re-notifying the Class Members, to be paid for jointly by Class Counsel 

and BAE SDSR directly to the Settlement Administrator (Rust Consulting, Inc.) without 

reducing the Settlement Fund.”2(Joint Statement 2 (emphasis in original).)

The Parties have attached their supplemental notice as an exhibit to their Joint 

Statement. (Joint Statement Ex. A (“Suppl. Notice”), ECF No. 58-1.) The Parties (I) jointly 

submit this supplemental notice for the Court’s approval, and (II) jointly propose 

notification procedures and a renewed date for the Final Fairness Hearing. The Court 

considers each in turn.

I. Supplemental Notice

Where there is a class settlement, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1) requires 

the court to “direct notice in a reasonable manner to all class members who would be bound 

by the proposal.” “Notice is satisfactory if it ‘generally describes the terms of the settlement 

in sufficient detail to alert those with adverse viewpoints to investigate and to come forward 

and be heard.’” Rodriguez v. W. Publ’g Corp., 563 F.3d 948, 962 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting 

Churchill Vill., LLC v. Gen. Elec., 361 F.3d 566, 575 (9th Cir. 2004)); see also Grunin v. 

Int’l House of Pancakes, 513 F.2d 114, 120 (8th Cir. 1975) (“[T]he mechanics of the notice 

process are left to the discretion of the court subject only to the broad ‘reasonableness’ 

standards imposed by due process.”).

In the Court’s August 2, 2017 Order, the Court noted two deficiencies in the Parties’ 

previous Class-wide notice. (See generally ECF No. 57.) In that Order, the Court instructed 

the Parties to propose a supplemental notice that: (1) informs the Class Members of the 

 

1 Pin citations to docketed material refer to the CM/ECF numbers electronically stamped at the top of each 

page.

2 The Parties also note that the supplemental notice will be translated into Spanish. (Joint Statement 2.)

Case 3:16-cv-02162-JLS-NLS Document 59 Filed 08/10/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 6
3

16-CV-2162 JLS (NLS)

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

entire scope of their release of liability, (id. at 6); and (2) alerts the Class Members to the 

existence of Class Counsel’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees so that they can have a proper 

opportunity to object to the motion before the Final Fairness Hearing, (id. at 11). 

The Court finds that this supplemental notice satisfactorily incorporates the Court’s 

August 2, 2017 ruling. As to the first issue, the Parties provide the following language:

1. Release Period:

By participating in the $2,900,000.00 settlement and receiving your 

share of the net settlement, as estimated in the original Notice, you will 

be releasing claims through the date that the District Court gives final 

approval of the settlement. For a complete statement and the details of 

the scope of all claims being released, please refer to the Joint 

Stipulation of Settlement and Release (“Settlement Agreement”) on file 

with the Court.

(Suppl. Notice 1 (emphasis in original).) This adequately apprises the Class Members of 

the full scope of their release of liability; namely, that acceptance of the Settlement would 

release their claims through the date on which the Court grants final approval of the 

Settlement. Thus, the Court finds that this language sufficiently incorporates the Court’s 

August 2, 2017 Order.

As to the second issue, the Parties provide the following language:

2. Attorney’s Fees Motion:

On July 6, 2017, Class Counsel filed a Motion for Attorney’s Fees in 

this case. The information supplied in the Motion for Attorney’s Fees 

supplements and is consistent with what was indicated in the original 

Notice that you received. You have the right to review this motion 

before making a decision as to whether you might elect to opt-out of 

the settlement or to object to this specific motion.

If you wish to review the Settlement Agreement or the Motion for 

Attorney’s Fees, you may do so in-person at the Courthouse, located at: 

221 West Broadway, San Diego, California 92101, online via the 

“PACER” website, which is accessible at: 

Case 3:16-cv-02162-JLS-NLS Document 59 Filed 08/10/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 6
4

16-CV-2162 JLS (NLS)

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

https://pacer.login.uscourts.gov/csologin/login.jsf, or by contacting 

Class Counsel [at a provided address.]

(Id.) The Court finds that this language both alerts Class Members to the existence of the 

Motion for Attorney’s Fees, and also provides three reasonable means for obtaining a copy 

of the motion. More importantly, this language adequately notifies the Class Members that 

they have an opportunity to object to the motion if they so desire. (Id.; see also id. at 3 

(outlining objection procedures).) Thus, the Court finds that this language sufficiently 

incorporates the Court’s August 2, 2017 ruling.

The supplemental notice also faithfully incorporates the Court’s other directives. For 

instance, the Court noted that the renewed period for opt-outs and limited objections would 

be forty-five days. (Compare ECF No. 57, at 7 (setting a forty-five-day period), with Suppl. 

Notice 3 (noting the same).) Moreover, the Court clarified that, during this forty-five-day 

period, it will not consider general objections to the Settlement because the Class has 

already had an adequate opportunity to so object. (ECF No. 57, at 7; id. n.6.) Nevertheless, 

the Court noted that it will consider objections limited to: (1) the temporal extent of the 

release of liability, and (2) Class Counsel’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees. (Id. at 7, 11.) The 

Parties’ supplemental notice sufficiently apprises Class Members of these opportunities. 

(Suppl. Notice 2; id. at 3 (noting that Class Members “may only object to the settlement at 

this stage if your objection is because: (1) you will be releasing claims through the date 

that the District Court gives final approval of the settlement, and/or (2) you object to the

Motion for Attorney’s Fees filed by class counsel” (emphasis in original)).) Accordingly, 

the Court finds that this supplemental notice is sufficient under Rule 23(e)(1) and 

adequately incorporates the Court’s August 2, 2017 Order.

II. Notification Procedures and Final Fairness Hearing Date

Now that the Court has approved the Parties’ supplemental notice, the Parties 

propose the following notification procedures:

Case 3:16-cv-02162-JLS-NLS Document 59 Filed 08/10/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 6
5

16-CV-2162 JLS (NLS)

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

a) within five (5) days of the Supplemental Notice being approved by the 

Court, that Rust will mail out the Supplemental Notice to all Settlement 

Class Members, using the updated addresses for all Settlement Class 

Members based on a NCOA search related to the initial mailing.

b) the Settlement Class Members will have forty-five (45) days from the date 

of mailing of the Supplemental Notice to send in/file any Objections or 

Opt-Out submissions as provided in the Supplemental Notice, which shall 

determine the postmark deadline for identifying valid, timely Objections 

and Opt-Outs.

c) on October 12, 2017, or as soon thereafter as is convenient for the Court, 

a Final Fairness Hearing shall take place before the Honorable Janis L. 

Sammartino in Courtroom 4D of the United States District Court for the 

Southern District of California.

d) at least seven (7) calendar days prior to the Final Fairness Hearing, the 

Parties shall file a Supplemental Brief to notify the Court of any Opt-Outs 

and to address the Objections filed, if any. This Supplemental Brief will 

also include a declaration from Rust regarding the status of any Objections 

and/or Opt-Outs received in response to the Supplemental Notice.

e) to the extent that there are any Objections that have not been filed with the 

Court, Rust will include such Objections with its declaration.

(Joint Statement 2–3.)

The Court finds that these procedures are generally adequate, subject to the 

following amendments. First, the proposed Final Fairness Hearing of October 12, 2017 is 

not available. Accordingly, the Court SETS the renewed date for the Final Fairness 

Hearing on Tuesday, November 7, 2017, at 1:30 p.m. Second, the Court will need 

additional time, beyond the proposed seven days, to review any supplemental brief filed 

by the Parties. Accordingly, the Parties SHALL FILE their supplemental brief on or before 

fourteen days from the date of the Final Fairness Hearing. With these amendments the 

Court finds that these proposed procedures are adequate under Rule 23. Accordingly, the

Parties SHALL proceed under these procedures, consistent with the Court’s amendments,

and revise their supplemental notice to include the relevant provisions.

Case 3:16-cv-02162-JLS-NLS Document 59 Filed 08/10/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 5 of 6
6

16-CV-2162 JLS (NLS)

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

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the Parties’ requests in their Joint 

Statement (ECF No. 58). Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS the Parties to provide this 

supplemental notice to the Class Members consistent with the Court’s Order. The Court 

also SETS the Final Fairness Hearing date on Tuesday, November 7, 2017, at 1:30 p.m.

The Court ORDERS the following schedule for further proceedings:

Event Date

Settlement Administrator to Send 

Supplemental Notice to Class 

Members

Within 5 days of the date on which 

this Order is electronically 

docketed

Last Day for Class Members to File 

Request for Exclusion from Settlement

No later than 45 days from the date 

of mailing the Notice

Last Day for Class Members to File 

Limited Objections to the 

Settlement/Motion for Attorney’s Fees

No later than 45 days from the date 

of mailing the Notice

Last Day for Class Members to File 

Notice of Intention to Appear at Final 

Fairness Hearing

No later than 45 days from the date 

of mailing the Notice

Parties to File Supplemental Brief No later than 14 days before the 

Final Fairness Hearing

Final Fairness Hearing November 7, 2017 at 1:30 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 10, 2017

Case 3:16-cv-02162-JLS-NLS Document 59 Filed 08/10/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 6 of 6