Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-07339/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-07339-42/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 28:1001 E.R.I.S.A.

---

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] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT 

[CASE NO. C-06-07339 CW] 

Daniel Feinberg – CA Bar No. 135983

Todd F. Jackson – CA Bar No. 202598 

Margaret E. Hasselman – CA Bar No. 228529 

Nina Wasow – CA Bar No. 202047 

Kirsten G. Scott – CA Bar No. 253464 

LEWIS, FEINBERG, LEE, 

RENAKER & JACKSON, P.C. 

1330 Broadway, Suite 1800 

Oakland, California 94612 

Telephone: (510) 839-6824 

Facsimile: (510) 839-7839 

Email: dfeinberg@lewisfeinberg.com 

Email: tjackson@lewisfeinberg.com 

Email: mhasselman@lewisfeinberg.com 

Email: nwasow@lewisfeinberg.com 

Email: kscott@lewisfeinberg.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class 

(Additional counsel on signature page)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO AND OAKLAND DIVISION

THOMAS FERNANDEZ, LORA SMITH, and 

TOSHA THOMAS, individually and on behalf 

of a class of all other persons similarly situated,

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

 

K-M INDUSTRIES HOLDING CO., INC.; 

K-M INDUSTRIES HOLDING CO., INC. 

ESOP PLAN COMMITTEE; WILLIAM E. 

AND DESIREE B. MOORE REVOCABLE 

TRUST; TRUSTEES OF THE WILLIAM E. 

AND DESIREE B. MOORE REVOCABLE 

TRUST; CIG ESOP PLAN COMMITTEE; 

NORTH STAR TRUST COMPANY; 

DESIREE B. MOORE REVOCABLE TRUST;

WILLIAM E. MOORE MARITAL TRUST; 

WILLIAM E. MOORE GENERATIONSKIPPING TRUST; and DESIREE MOORE, 

BOTH IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY 

AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE WILLIAM E. 

AND DESIREE B. MOORE REVOCABLE 

TRUST’S SUCCESSOR TRUSTS NAMED 

ABOVE, 

 Defendants. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No. C-06-07339 CW 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ 

MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF 

CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT 

Case 4:06-cv-07339-CW Document 406 Filed 04/23/10 Page 1 of 3
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] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT 2 

[CASE NO. C-06-07339 CW] 

This matter comes before the Court on the Class Plaintiffs’ Motion for Final Approval of 

Class Action Settlement to grant final approval of the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement 

(“Settlement” or “Settlement Agreement”) between Class Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and 

the Class, and Defendant North Star Trust Company (“NSTC”), as well as the Moore Trust 

Defendants and the KMH Defendants (collectively the “Settling Parties”), by and through their 

respective counsel. 

The proposed settlement in this case was preliminarily approved by this Court on January 

22, 2010 (“Preliminary Approval Order”) [Docket No. 390]. Pursuant to the Court’s Preliminary 

Approval Order and the Notice provided to the Class, the Court conducted a fairness hearing 

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e) on April 22, 2010. The Court has reviewed the materials submitted 

by the parties, and has heard arguments presented at such hearing. For the reasons cited on the 

record as well as those stated hereafter, the Court finds and orders as follows: 

1. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

1331 and 29 U.S.C. § 1132(f). 

2. The notice given to the Class fully and accurately informed Class Members of all 

material elements of the proposed settlement, constituted the best notice practicable under the 

circumstances, constituted valid, due and sufficient notice to all Class Members, and complied 

fully with Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the United States Constitution. 

3. The Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate in all respects to the 

Class Members pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court finds that 

the uncertainty and delay of further litigation strongly support the reasonableness and adequacy of 

the $15 million settlement. 

4. No class member has objected to any aspect of the proposed settlement. The 

reaction of the Class to the proposed settlement strongly supports the conclusion that the 

proposed settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. Accordingly, the Court finds that the 

settlement is, in all respects, fair, reasonable and adequate, and hereby grants final approval of the 

settlement. 

Case 4:06-cv-07339-CW Document 406 Filed 04/23/10 Page 2 of 3
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] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT 3 

[CASE NO. C-06-07339 CW] 

5. The Court finds and determines that NSTC’s notice of Settlement to State 

Attorneys General and United States Attorneys General, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 

1715(b), was timely, adequate, and compliant with the statutory requirements of the Class Action 

Fairness Act. 

6. The Court reserves exclusive and continuing jurisdiction over the class action, the 

Named Plaintiffs, the Class, and the Defendants for the purposes of supervising the 

implementation, enforcement, construction, and interpretation of the Settlement Agreement, the 

Preliminary Approval Order, the distribution of Settlement Payments, and this Order. 

7. All claims, counterclaims, and cross-claims in this action are hereby dismissed 

with prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 4/23/2010 ________________________ 

 The Honorable Claudia Wilken 

 United States District Judge 

Case 4:06-cv-07339-CW Document 406 Filed 04/23/10 Page 3 of 3