Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-05665/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-05665-18/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

[Proposed] Order Re: Attorney’s Fees No. C 13-05665 YGR 

and Incentive Fee to Class Representative 

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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JOHN LOFTON, an individual, on his own 

behalf and on behalf of all others similarly 

situated, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

VERIZON WIRELESS (VAW) LLC, and 

DOES 1-100, inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

 

No. C 13-05665 YGR 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 

ATTORNEY’S FEES AND AN INCENTIVE 

AWARD TO THE CLASS 

REPRESENTATIVE 

*AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT* 

Case 4:13-cv-05665-YGR Document 218 Filed 05/27/16 Page 1 of 4
[Proposed] Order Re: Attorney’s Fees 2 No. C 13-05665 YGR 

and Incentive Fee to Class Representative 

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 

Plaintiff John Lofton’s (“Lofton”) Motion for Attorney’s Fee Award and Class 

Representative’s Incentive Award (“Motion”) was heard by this Court at the Final Approval 

Hearing on May 24, 2016, before the Honorable Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. All Parties appeared 

through their counsel of record. Defendant Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLC (“Verizon”) does not 

oppose the Motion. 

Based on the Motion and supporting Memorandum of Points and Authorities and the 

declarations in support thereof, the Parties’ Stipulation and Settlement Agreement (“Settlement 

Agreement”), and the arguments of counsel at the hearing on the Motion, and with good cause 

appearing, the Court rules as follows: 

1. The capitalized terms used in this Order have the same meaning as defined in the 

Settlement Agreement, which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 

2. This Court, having considered Class Counsel’s request for an award of attorneys’ 

fees and reimbursement of expenses, hereby grants the request and awards Class Counsel 

attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses in the total amount of $1.2 million. This amount 

was reasonable under a common fund analysis in light of the circumstances of this case. Such 

amounts are to be paid to Class Counsel by the Settlement Administrator Class Counsel out of 

the Common Fund within ten (10) days of the later of (i) the Effective Date; or (ii) the date on 

which the Plan of Allocation becomes Final, as defined in the Plan of Allocation, which is 

attached hereto as Exhibit 2. 

3. The award of attorneys’ fees to Class Counsel shall be allocated among Class 

Counsel in a fashion that, in the opinion of Class Counsel, fairly compensates Plaintiff’s counsel 

for their respective contributions in the prosecution of this action. The Court has considered this 

award of attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses separately from the merits of the 

settlement and the Court has considered and finds as follows: 

a. Class Counsel have conducted the litigation and achieved the Settlement 

with skill, perseverance, and diligent advocacy on behalf of Lofton and the Settlement Class as a 

whole. 

Case 4:13-cv-05665-YGR Document 218 Filed 05/27/16 Page 2 of 4
[Proposed] Order Re: Attorney’s Fees 3 No. C 13-05665 YGR 

and Incentive Fee to Class Representative 

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 

b. The Action involves a myriad of factual and legal issues and, in the 

absence of Settlement, would involve further lengthy proceedings and uncertain resolution of 

such issues. 

c. Had Settlement not been achieved, there would remain a significant risk 

that the Settlement Class may have recovered less or nothing from Verizon, and that any 

recovery would have been significantly delayed. 

d. The amount of attorneys’ fees and reimbursable expenses awarded to 

Class Counsel is fair and reasonable, given the number of attorney hours expended to achieve the 

Settlement on behalf of Lofton and the Settlement Class as a whole, and the estimated value of 

the settlement benefits obtained for the Settlement Class, and the amount awarded is consistent 

with awards for similar work in similar cases. 

4. Having considered all the circumstances presented in the Motion for Attorney’s 

Fee Award and Class Representative’s Incentive Award, the Court specifically finds that it is 

appropriate to exceed the benchmark award of 25 percent because of the substantial results 

achieved (a $4 million common fund); the risks of class litigation against an able defendant well 

able to defend itself vigorously (as evidenced by the five motions Verizon brought to dismiss all 

or part of Lofton’s case), as well as the significant risks posed by Collecto’s concealment of its 

dialers’ call logs and/or call detail reports; the skill and effort expended by Class Counsel in 

opposing Verizon’s motion practice and detecting and obtaining a judicial determination of 

Collecto’s discovery misconduct; the fact that Class Counsel litigated this case for four years 

entirely on a contingency fee basis, advancing tens of thousands of dollars doing so; and Class 

Counsel’s significant lodestar, which exceeds the fee award requested, and which the Court 

finds, in general, reasonably necessary given both Verizon’s motion practice and Collecto’s 

conduct in discovery. That said, the Court does not award the full amount requested as Class 

Counsel’s own conduct contributed, in part, to the overly litigious nature of this Action. 

5. This Court, having considered Plaintiff’s request for an incentive fee, hereby 

grants the request and awards Lofton an incentive fee of $15,000. Such incentive fee shall be 

Case 4:13-cv-05665-YGR Document 218 Filed 05/27/16 Page 3 of 4
[Proposed] Order Re: Attorney’s Fees 4 No. C 13-05665 YGR 

and Incentive Fee to Class Representative 

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 

paid by the Settlement Administrator to Lofton out of the Common Fund within ten (10) days of 

the later of (1) the Effective Date and (2) the date on which the Plan of Allocation becomes 

Final, as defined in the Plan of Allocation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 27, 2016 ___________________________________ 

 Honorable Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers 

 United States District Judge 

Case 4:13-cv-05665-YGR Document 218 Filed 05/27/16 Page 4 of 4