Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_04-cv-01852/USCOURTS-casd-3_04-cv-01852-0/pdf.json

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

---

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 Final Approval of Class Action Settlement 04cv1852 JAH

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DREW TAKACS and RYAN FLYNN,

individually, and on behalf of all others similarly

situated, 

Plaintiffs,

vs.

A.G. EDWARDS & SONS, INC. 

Defendants.

______________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 04 CV 1852 JAH(NLS)

ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF

CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Date: November 5, 2007

Time: 2:30 p.m.

Ctrm: 11

Hon. John A. Houston

Case 3:04-cv-01852-JAH-NLS Document 226 Filed 11/05/07 Page 1 of 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

 [Proposed] Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement 04cv1852 JAH -1-

On November 5, 2007, the Court heard plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for final approval of the

class action settlement (“Settlement”) in the above-captioned action. After reviewing plaintiffs’ briefs,

and after hearing arguments of counsel, the Court finds and orders as follows: 

1. For the purposes of this Order, the Court adopts all defined terms as set forth in the Joint

Stipulation and Settlement Agreement (“Stipulation”), previously filed with this Court on May 25, 2007,

Docket No. 210.

2. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this litigation and over all parties

and Class Members in this litigation.

3. The Court finds that the distribution of the Notice of Class Action Settlement as provided

in the Stipulation constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances and fully met the

requirements of due process.

4. The Court finds that no Class Members have objected to the Settlement. Only 5 Class

Members, representing less than 0.004% of the Class, have requested exclusion from the Settlement.

Approximately 82.5% of the Class Members have filed claims, and these Class Members worked

approximately 92.3% of the total months worked by all Class Members during the Class Period.

Accordingly, the Court finds that the Class views the Settlement favorably. 

5. The Court finds that the Settlement was the product of protracted, arm’s-length

negotiations between experienced counsel, facilitated by two respected mediators. After considering

the defendant’s exposure, the plaintiffs’ likelihood of success on their claims, the risk, expense,

complexity, and delay associated with further litigation, the risk of maintaining class certification

through trial, the experience and views of Class Counsel, and the reaction of the Class to the Settlement,

as well as other relevant factors, the Court finds that the Settlement is fair, reasonable, and in the best

interests of the Class and hereby grants final approval of the Settlement. Plaintiffs and defendant are

ordered to carry out the Settlement as provided in the Stipulation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 5, 2007

HON. JOHN A. HOUSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:04-cv-01852-JAH-NLS Document 226 Filed 11/05/07 Page 2 of 2