Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-05006/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-05006-6/pdf.json

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

---

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY

APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

13-CV-05006-LHK

\LA - 039936/000011 - 1141641 v1 

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

JEFFREY LAPAN, ASHWIN CHANDRA, 

CLAUDIA BLEUS, on behalf of themselves 

and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

PVH CORP., TOMMY HILFIGER RETAIL, 

LLC, PVH RETAIL STORES, LLC, PVH 

WHOLESALE NEW JERSEY INC., PVH 

NECKWEAR INC., PVH WHOLESALE 

CORP., PVH PUERTO RICO, INC., 

CALVIN KLEIN, INC., TOMMY 

HILFIGER USA, INC., PVH GUAM, INC., 

WARNACO, INC., WARNACO U.S., INC., 

WARNACO GROUP, INC., AND 

WARNACO SWIMWEAR PRODUCTS, 

INC.

Defendants.

Case No. 13-CV-05006-LHK

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 

PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS 

ACTION SETTLEMENT

Date: August 6, 2015

Time: 1:30 p.m.

Courtroom 8, 4th Floor

Hon. Lucy H. Koh

Case 5:13-cv-05006-LHK Document 93 Filed 08/07/15 Page 1 of 4
1

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY

APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

13-CV-05006-LHK

\LA - 039936/000011 - 1141641 v1 

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

The Motion for Preliminary Approval of a Class Action Settlement (“Motion”) came on 

for hearing before the Honorable Lucy H. Koh on August 6, 2015, in Courtroom 8 of the 

United States District Court, Northern District of California, 280 South First Street, San Jose, 

California. The Court, having considered the papers submitted in support of the Motion and 

good cause having been found, HEREBY ORDERS THE FOLLOWING:

1. The Court grants preliminary approval of the Settlement based upon the terms 

set forth in the “Joint Stipulation of Class Action Settlement and Release” (the “Joint 

Stipulation”), ECF No. 85-1, and as set forth in this Order. Capitalized terms in this Order 

shall have the definitions set forth in the Joint Stipulation.

2. The Court finds that the standards for certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 and 

conditional certification under 29 U.SC. § 216(b) are satisfied for the reasons set forth in the 

moving papers. Accordingly, the Court hereby preliminarily certifies the following Settlement 

Classes:

a. Nationwide Settlement Class: All current and former employees who 

worked for Defendants in the U.S. and U.S. territories, other than California, 

from October 25, 2009, through the date of preliminary approval and who were 

paid wages at any time via the Payroll Distribution Service.

b. FLSA Settlement Class: All current and former non-exempt 

employees who worked for Defendants in the U.S. and U.S. territories, other 

than California, from October 25, 2010, through the date of preliminary 

approval and who were paid wages at any time via the Payroll Distribution 

Service.

c. California Class: This class consists of both (a) all current and former 

employees who worked for Defendants in California from July 17, 2014, 

through the date of preliminary approval by the Court and who were paid 

wages at any time after July 17, 2014, via the Payroll Distribution Service, and 

(b) all current and former employees who worked for Defendants in California 

from March 20, 2009, through the date of preliminary approval, who were paid 

Case 5:13-cv-05006-LHK Document 93 Filed 08/07/15 Page 2 of 4
2

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY

APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

13-CV-05006-LHK

\LA - 039936/000011 - 1141641 v1 

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

wages at any time via the Payroll Distribution Service, and who affirmatively 

opted-out of the settlement in Chavez v. PVH Corp., et al., N.D. Cal. Case No. 

13-01797. 

3. The Court hereby preliminarily determines that the Settlement set forth in the 

Joint Stipulation falls within the range of reasonableness and appears to be presumptively valid, 

subject only to any objections that may be raised at the Final Approval Hearing. It appears to 

the Court that substantial investigation and research have been conducted such that counsel for

the Parties at this time are reasonably able to evaluate their respective positions. It further 

appears to the Court that settlement will avoid substantial additional costs by all Parties, as well 

as the delay and risk that would be presented by further prosecution of the Litigation. It further 

appears to the Court that the proposed settlement that has been reached is the result of 

intensive, serious, non-collusive, arm’s-length negotiations.

4. In the sentence describing the Lopez v. PVH Corp. litigation in the Class 

Notices, the parties must insert a space between “PVH” and “Corp.” Subject to correction 

of this typographical error, the Court approves, as to form and content and as agreed to by the 

Parties, the Summary Notice, the Class Notices, and the Claim Forms in substantially the forms 

attached to the Joint Stipulation as Exhibits 1-5, respectively, with the amendments ordered by 

the Court at the August 6, 2015 preliminary approval hearing. The Court finds that these 

documents fairly and adequately apprise Settlement Class Members of their rights under the 

Settlement.

5. The Court directs the mailing of the Summary Class Notice and the creation of 

an interactive, password-protected website to make available the Class Notices and the Claim 

Forms in accordance with the schedule and procedures set forth in the Joint Stipulation. The 

Court finds that the dates and method selected for the mailing and publication of the Summary 

Class Notice, Class Notices and Claim Forms, as set forth in the Joint Stipulation, meet the 

requirements of due process and provide the best notice practicable under the circumstances, 

and shall constitute due and sufficient notice to all persons entitled thereto.

6. The Claims Administrator shall be Rust Consulting 625 Marquette Avenue, 

Case 5:13-cv-05006-LHK Document 93 Filed 08/07/15 Page 3 of 4
3

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY

APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

13-CV-05006-LHK

\LA - 039936/000011 - 1141641 v1 

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

Suite 880 Minneapolis, MN 55402.

7. The Court finds that Wynne Law Firm has adequately represented the 

Settlement Classes and is preliminarily appointed as Class Counsel.

8. For settlement purposes only, the Court finds that Plaintiffs Jeffrey Lapan, 

Ashwin Chandra and Claudia Bleus (“Plaintiffs”) are adequate representatives of the 

Settlement Classes and preliminarily appoints them as such.

9. A Final Approval Hearing on the question of whether the proposed Settlement 

should be finally approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate as to the members of the 

Settlement Class is scheduled for 1:30 p.m. on January 21, 2016 in Courtroom 8 of the United 

States District Court, Northern District of California, 280 South First Street, San Jose, 

California. The purpose of such hearing will be to: (a) determine whether the Joint Stipulation 

should be finally approved by the Court as fair, reasonable and adequate; (b) determine the 

reasonableness of Class Counsel’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs; (c) determine the 

reasonableness of the class representatives enhancement fees; (d) confirm appointment of Class 

Counsel and the class representatives; and (e) order entry of Judgment in the Litigation. The 

date for the Final Approval Hearing may be continued or adjourned by order of the Court 

without further notice to members of the Settlement Class, with the exception that Class 

Counsel shall provide notice to those Settlement Class Members who have filed timely Notices 

of Objection.

Dated: August 7, 2015

Hon. Lucy H. Koh

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Case 5:13-cv-05006-LHK Document 93 Filed 08/07/15 Page 4 of 4