Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02294/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02294-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange 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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHASSIN HOLDINGS CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

FORMULA VC LTD., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-02294-EMC 

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE 

JUDGE’S REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION; AND 

GRANTING JOINT MOTION FOR 

GOOD FAITH DETERMINATION AND 

BARRING CLAIMS AGAINST 

PARTICIPATING DEFENDANTS

Docket Nos. 71, 80

The Court has reviewed the parties’ Joint Motion for Determination of Good Faith 

Settlement pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure §§ 877 and 877.6 (“Motion”), Docket

No. 71, as well as the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation that the Motion be granted 

in full, Docket No. 80. The Court agrees, and hereby adopts the Magistrate Judge’s 

recommendation.

The Court therefore finds as follows:

1. The Settlement and Release Agreement (the “Settlement”) between Plaintiff 

Chassin Holdings Corporation, on the one hand, and Defendants Formula VD Fund I, GP, L.P., 

Formula VC Ltd., and Renata Akhunova, on the other hand (the “Participating Defendants”), a

copy of which is attached to the Declaration of Renata Akhunova in support of the Joint Motion, 

was made in good faith within the meaning of Sections 877 and 877.6 of the California Code of 

Civil Procedure. The Court notes that it has independently reviewed the factors set out in TechBilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & Assocs., 38 Cal. 3d 488, 499 (1985), and concludes, based on 

those factors, that a determination of good faith is warranted. In particular, the Court notes that 

with respect to proportional liability, the Court observes that the settlement agreement calls for the 

Case 3:15-cv-02294-EMC Document 83 Filed 09/21/16 Page 1 of 2
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

For the Northern District of California

Participating Defendants to pay $100,000, while Plaintiff anticipates requesting a default judgment 

against the nonparticipating Defendant Andrey Kessel in excess of $1 million. Motion at 7. This 

disparity is justified in light of the uncontroverted allegations that Mr. Kessel was primarily 

responsible for the wrongful conduct alleged in Plaintiff’s complaint and was substantially more 

culpable than Participating Defendants.

2. Notice has been given to all non-settling defendants.

3. Good cause appears to grant the Joint Motion and approve the relief requested 

therein.

Upon the foregoing reasons and findings, the Court hereby:

ORDERS that the Joint Motion for Good Faith Determination is GRANTED in its 

entirety;

FURTHER ORDERS that the Settlement is APPROVED;

FURTHER ORDERS that all claims against the Participating Defendants for contribution 

and/or indemnity by any other party to this Action or any other joint tortfeasor or co-obligor 

related to the claims that were presented or could have been presented in this Action are hereby 

BARRED; and

FURTHER ORDERS that any and all claims, cross claims, or counterclaims asserted 

between Plaintiff, on the one hand, and the Participating Defendants, on the other, are hereby 

DISMISSED with prejudice.

This order disposes of Docket Nos. 71 and 80.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 21, 2016

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-02294-EMC Document 83 Filed 09/21/16 Page 2 of 2