Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-01967/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-01967-129/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

Case No. 09-cv-01967 CW (NC) 

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAMUEL MICHAEL KELLER, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ELECTRONIC ARTS INC., et al.,

Defendants.

EDWARD O’BANNON, et al. 

 Plaintiffs, 

v. 

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC 

ASSOCIATION; ELECTRONIC ARTS 

INC., and COLLEGIATE LICENSING 

COMPANY, 

 Defendants.

Case No. 09-cv-01967 CW (NC)

 09-cv-3329 CW (NC)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL 

CLAIM AS UNTIMELY

Kevin B. Cronin, a class member in this case, appeals the Administrator’s initial 

determination of his point allotment of 6.6 EA Settlement Points and 6.6 NCAA 

Settlement Points. Cronin claims that he is entitled to 19.8 EA Settlement Points and 19.8 

NCAA Settlement points. He asserts that the Administrator failed to send him the required 

First Letter or otherwise notify him of the process of his claim and failed to issue the 

required Objection Response Letter following his objection to his initial score calculation. 

However, Cronin did not file a timely objection to his point assignment. In his 

appeal to the Court, Cronin states that the first time he objected to his point assignment 

Case 4:09-cv-01967-CW Document 1300 Filed 04/19/16 Page 1 of 2
Case No. 09-cv-01967 CW (NC) 2

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

was February 16, 2016, six weeks after the deadline for objecting had passed.

Although Cronin asserts that his objection was timely because he first saw his point

assignment on February 16, 2016, the dispute process approved by the Court did not 

provide for a 30-day objection period from the date of the receipt of a First Letter to 

Claimant (or the date of the receipt of the point assignment). Instead, it provided that in 

order to object to his point assignment, “[a] claimant . . . must submit a written objection 

. . . postmarked within 30 days of [the] date on the First Letter to Claimant.” Dkt. 1241-3 

at ¶ 3. This is consistent with the language of the Settlement Agreements, which provide 

that objections must be submitted “within thirty (30) days of the date of the Notice and 

Claims Administrator’s letter.” Dkt. 1158-2 at ¶ 62(g); Dkt. 1158-1 at ¶ 76(g).

Because Cronin did not file any Claim Objection before the December 30, 2015 

deadline, he cannot submit an appeal to the Court. The Court dismisses his Objection 

Appeal and his point allocation will remain the same, at 6.6 points per settlement, for a 

total recovery of $890.88. A check in that amount was mailed to him on April 6, 2016.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 19, 2016 _____________________________________

NATHANAEL M. COUSINS

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:09-cv-01967-CW Document 1300 Filed 04/19/16 Page 2 of 2