Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02481/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02481-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION

SETTLEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAUREN CHAIKIN, an individual, on 

behalf of herself and all others similarly 

situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

LULULEMON USA INC., a Nevada 

Corporation, LULULEMON 

ATHLETICA INC., a Delaware 

Corporation, and DOES 1 through 50, 

inclusive,

Defendants.

CASE NO.: 3:12-CV-02481-GPCMDD

ORDER PRELIMINARYILY 

APPROVING CLASS ACTION 

SETTLEMENT, CERTIFYING 

THE CLASS, APPOINTING CLASS

REPRESENTATIVE AND CLASS

COUNSEL, APPROVING NOTICE 

PLAN, AND SETTING FINAL 

APPROVAL HEARING 

[Dkt. No. 24]

Case 3:12-cv-02481-GPC-MDD Document 25 Filed 11/06/13 Page 1 of 10
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

-1-

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION

SETTLEMENT

Named Plaintiff Lauren Chaikin (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant lululemon USA 

Inc. and lululemon Athletica Inc. (“lululemon” or “Defendants”) have entered into 

a Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”) dated April 1, 2013, which, if finally 

approved, would resolve this putative Class action case (“Litigation”). The parties 

seek preliminary approval of Class action settlement under Rule 23(e) of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

The putative Class action is brought by Plaintiff on behalf of herself and all 

other customers who purchased merchandise from stores owned and operated by 

Defendants in California, used a credit card to make an in-store purchase, and 

whose personal identification information was requested and recorded by a 

lululemon employee. (Dkt. No. 8, “Amended Complaint.”) Plaintiff alleges these 

acts constitute a violation of the Song-Beverly Credit Card Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 

1747.08. (Id.) 

Defendants, retailers which own and operate retail stores throughout 

California, deny all claims of wrongdoing and assert several defenses on the 

grounds that it did not violate any laws relating to its’ alleged conduct. (Dkt. No. 

10, “Answer.”)

The parties have engaged in extensive arms-length negotiations and entered 

into a Settlement Agreement and Release. (Dkt. No. 24-3.) Plaintiff has engaged in 

informal discovery and analyzed the relevant legal issues with regards to the 

claims and potential defenses to the action. (Dkt. No. 24-2.) Defendants provided 

Plaintiff with information relating to its policies and practices regarding the 

collection of personal identification information and the approximate total number 

of Class Members. (Id.) Plaintiff and her counsel considered the uncertainties of 

trial and the benefits to be obtained under the proposed Settlement and have 

considered the costs, risks, and delays associated with the continued prosecution of 

this time-consuming litigation and the likely appeals of any rulings in favor of 

either Plaintiff or Defendant. (Id.) Defendant agrees that counsel for each of the 

Case 3:12-cv-02481-GPC-MDD Document 25 Filed 11/06/13 Page 2 of 10
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

-2-

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION

SETTLEMENT

Parties has sufficient information to assess the strengths, weaknesses, and likely 

expense of taking this case to trial. (Id.) Defendants also recognize that the 

expense and time spent pursuing this Litigation has and will further detract from 

resources that may be used to run Defendants’ business. (Dkt. No. 24-3.) Both 

parties conclude that the Agreement is fair, reasonable, adequate and in the best 

interests of the Settlement Class. (Id.) 

Due to the uncertainties and expense of protracted litigation, the Parties 

engaged in negotiations and ultimately agreed on the material terms of the 

Settlement Agreement. (Dkt. No. 24-3.) The Agreement was reached only after 

investigation and informal discovery was conducted during the Litigation, and was 

the result of negotiations between the parties as embodied in the Agreement. (Id.)

The Court has read and considered the Agreement and all exhibits attached 

thereto, including the proposed notices and claim form, and finds there is sufficient 

basis for: (1) granting preliminary approval of the Agreement; (2) provisionally 

certifying a Class for settlement purposes; (3) preliminarily approving the form, 

manner and content of the Class Notices and Claim Form; (4) appointing Plaintiff 

Lauren Chaikin as Class representative and her counsel as Class Counsel; (5)

directing the Notice be disseminated to the Class; and (5) setting a hearing at 

which the Court will consider whether to grant final approval of the Agreement. 

Based on the foregoing, the Court hereby GRANTS the Plaintiff’s 

Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval. Accordingly, the Court herby 

makes the following findings and orders: 

1. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, the Court hereby 

certifies, for purposes of settlement, this Litigation as a Class action on behalf of 

the following Class:

All persons who used a credit card to purchase 

merchandise at one of the Affected Locations 

during the applicable Class Period, and from 

whom Defendants requested and recorded their 

ZIP code. 

Case 3:12-cv-02481-GPC-MDD Document 25 Filed 11/06/13 Page 3 of 10
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

-3-

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION

SETTLEMENT

Excluded from the Settlement Class are all persons who used a debit card, business 

credit card or a prepaid credit card to purchase merchandise; all persons who only 

engaged in a transaction that involved shipping, delivery, return or servicing of the 

purchased merchandise, or for special orders; all persons who opt-out of the 

settlement in a timely and correct manner; Defendants, its subsidiaries, affiliates, 

successors, assigns, any entity in which Defendants have a controlling interest and 

all of their respective officers, directors, and employees; counsel of record and 

their respective law firms for either of the Parties; and the presiding judge in the 

Action, his family members and relatives.

2. The Court finds that the Class meets the requirements of Rule 23(a), 

and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Joinder of all Class Members 

in a single proceeding would be impracticable because of the size of the potential 

Class is approximately 13, 912. (See Dkt. No. 24-4, “Stonebarger Decl.” at ¶ 7.) 

Common issues exist among Class Members and predominate over questions 

affecting individual Class Members only. In particular, each Class Member’s 

claim depends on whether lululemon’s conduct of requesting and recording 

personal identification information from its credit card customers violated 

California Civil Code Section 1747.08. The named Plaintiff’s claims are typical of 

and identical to those of the Class, as Plaintiff alleges she was exposed to the same 

alleged unlawful policy and practice of lululemon. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges 

that lululemon requested and recorded her personal identification information 

during a credit card purchase transaction. The Plaintiff and her counsel will fairly 

and adequately protect the interests of the Class, as Plaintiff has no interests 

antagonistic to the Class and has retained experienced and competent counsel to 

prosecute this matter on behalf of the Class. Finally, a Class settlement is superior 

to other methods available for a fair resolution of the controversy. 

3. The Court approves Plaintiff Lauren Chaikin as Class Representative.

Case 3:12-cv-02481-GPC-MDD Document 25 Filed 11/06/13 Page 4 of 10
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

-4-

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION

SETTLEMENT

4. Having considered the factors set forth in Rule 23(g)(1) of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court appoints Plaintiff’s counsel, the law firms of 

Stonebarger Law, APC, Patterson Law Group, APC and Pilot Law, P.C. as Class

Counsel. 

5. The Court preliminarily approves the Agreement, including the Class

Notice, short form Class Notice, and Claim Form, attached to the Agreement as 

Exhibits A through C. The Court finds that the terms of the Agreement appear 

sufficient, fair, reasonable, and adequate to warrant dissemination of Notice of the 

proposed settlement to the Class. 

6. The Agreement contains no obvious deficiencies and the parties have 

entered into the Agreement in good faith, following arms-length negotiation 

between their respective counsel. The Court’s approval of this Agreement is made 

subject to further consideration at the Final Approval Hearing Date. 

7. Pursuant to Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the 

Court will hold a final approval hearing (the “Final Approval Hearing Date”) on 

March 14, 2014, at 1:30 p.m., in Courtroom 2D before the undersigned judge of 

the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, for the 

following purposes: 

a. to finally determine whether the Class meets all applicable requirements 

of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a), (b)(2), and (b)(3), for purposes of 

effectuating the Agreement; 

b. to determine whether the proposed Settlement of the Litigation on the 

terms and conditions provided for in the Agreement is fair, reasonable, and 

adequate and should be finally approved by the Court;

c. to consider the application of Class Counsel for an award of attorneys’ 

fees and costs, as provided for in the Agreement;

d. to consider the application of the named Plaintiff for a Class

representative incentive award, as provided for in the Agreement;

Case 3:12-cv-02481-GPC-MDD Document 25 Filed 11/06/13 Page 5 of 10
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

-5-

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION

SETTLEMENT

e. to consider whether the Court should enter the proposed Judgment, Final 

Order and Decree;

f. to consider whether the release by the Class Members of the Released 

Claims as set forth in the Agreement should be provided; and

g. to otherwise rule upon such matters as the Court may deem just and 

appropriate.

8. Class Members must file and serve any objections to the proposed 

settlement no later than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the Final Approval 

Hearing Date and must include any memoranda and/or other submissions in 

support of the objections. This deadline to file and serve objections shall be set 

forth in the Class Notice.

9. All papers in support of the Agreement, including the Parties’ Joint 

Motion for Final Approval and any response to an objection, must be filed with the 

Court and served at least twenty-one (21) calendar days prior to the Final 

Approval Hearing date.

10. Any applications for an award of attorney fees, costs, and/or a Classrepresentative incentive award must be filed with the Court and served at least 

forty-five (45) calendar days prior to the Final Approval Hearing date. After filing, 

any such applications shall be posted on the Settlement Website for review by 

Class Members. 

11. The Court approves the form and procedure for disseminating Notice 

of the proposed Settlement to the Class as set forth in the Section V of the 

Agreement. The Notice Plan provides for notice to the Class by publication. The 

Court finds that the Notice Plan submitted by the Parties constitutes the best notice 

practicable under the circumstances, and constitutes valid and sufficient notice to 

the Class in full compliance with the requirements of applicable law, including 

Rule 23 and the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. Pursuant to 

the Notice Plan, Defendants lululemon USA Inc. and lululemon Athletica Inc. 

Case 3:12-cv-02481-GPC-MDD Document 25 Filed 11/06/13 Page 6 of 10
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

-6-

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION

SETTLEMENT

("Defendants" or "lululemon") shall notify Class Members of the settlement in the 

manner specified under Section V of the Agreement within thirty (30) calendar 

days from the date of this Order. The short form Class Notice must be posted at 

Defendants' Lake Tahoe and San Diego showrooms and the Studio City retail store 

for at least thirty (30) calendar days. The Class Notice must be published on the 

settlement website for at least thirty (30) days. The Class Notice will be emailed 

by the Settlement Administrator to the Settlement Class Members who provided 

their email addresses at the affected locations. Defendants shall pay all costs 

associated with claims administration and providing notice to Class Members. No 

later than fourteen (14) days after the Objection/Exclusion Deadline, Defendants 

are to provide Plaintiff with a declaration or declarations from the Settlement 

Administrator confirming that the notice has been provided in accordance with 

Section V of the Agreement.

12. Class Notice, short form Class Notice, and Claim Form (all attached 

to the Agreement) comply with due process because the notices and claim form are 

reasonably calculated to adequately apprise Class Members of (i) the pending 

lawsuit, (ii) the proposed settlement, and (iii) their rights, including the right to 

either participate in the settlement, exclude themselves from the settlement, or 

object to the settlement;

13. The Court approves the duties of the Settlement Administrator as 

outlined in the Section IV of the Agreement and the parties’ agreement that 

Defendants shall bear the costs and fees associated with administering the 

Agreement. All disputes related to the Settlement Administrator’s ability and need 

to perform its duties shall be referred to the Court. 

14. All Class Members shall be bound by all determinations and 

judgments in the Litigation concerning the settlement, whether favorable or 

unfavorable to the Class. 

15. Any Class Member who wishes to participate in the settlement shall 

Case 3:12-cv-02481-GPC-MDD Document 25 Filed 11/06/13 Page 7 of 10
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

-7-

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION

SETTLEMENT

complete a Claim Form and submit it to the Class Action Administrator no later 

than ninety (90) calendar days after the date the Court enters the final judgment 

approving the settlement (“Claim-In Period”). Such deadline may be further 

extended without notice to the Class by Court order. 

16. Class Members who want to receive a credit voucher under the 

Agreement, but did not provide his/her email address to be included on Defendants' 

product notification mailing list, must accurately and completely fill out a Claim 

Form and submit it to the Claims Administrator by U.S. mail within thirty (30)

calendar days after the last date on which the Class Notice is published to Class

Members. 

17. Class Members who have not submitted a timely written exclusion 

request and who want to object to the Agreement must file a written objection 

and/or a Notice of Intention to Appear with the Court, and serve copies on Class

Counsel and Defendant's Counsel no later than thirty (30) calendar days after the 

last date on which the Class Notice is published to Class Members. To be 

considered, all objections must be timely, in writing, signed and dated by the 

objector (or his or her attorney, if applicable), must reference the abbreviated name 

and case number of the Litigation, and must contain the following information: (i) 

the objector’s name, address, and telephone number; (ii) the name, address, and 

telephone number of any attorney for the objector with respect to the objection; 

(iii) the factual basis and legal grounds for the objection; and (iv) identification of 

the case name, case number, and court for any prior Class action lawsuit in which 

the objector and attorney (if applicable) has objected to a proposed Class action 

settlement, the general nature of such prior objection(s), and the outcome of said 

prior objection(s). 

18. Class Members who fail to timely file and serve a written objection in 

the manner specified above shall be deemed to have waived any objections and 

Case 3:12-cv-02481-GPC-MDD Document 25 Filed 11/06/13 Page 8 of 10
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

-8-

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION

SETTLEMENT

shall be foreclosed from making any objection, whether by appeal or otherwise, to 

the Settlement.

19. Class Members who wish to exclude themselves from the Settlement 

must mail to the Settlement Administrator, not later than thirty (30) days after the 

last date Class Notice is published to Class Members, a written statement 

containing the mandatory language for the Request for Exclusion as provided in 

the Class Notice. Any Class Member who properly excludes himself or herself 

shall not be entitled to any payment or benefit from the Settlement, shall not be 

bound by the Settlement. 

20. If a Class Member hires an attorney to represent him or her in support 

of a timely and properly submitted objection, and the attorney wishes to appear at 

the Final Approval Hearing, in addition to the foregoing requirements, that 

attorney must (1) file both an entry of appearance and a notice of intention to 

appear and participate at the Final Approval Hearing with the Clerk of the Court no 

later than thirty (30) calendar days before the Final Approval Hearing, and (2) mail 

copies of the entry of appearance and the notice of intention to appear and 

participate at the Final Approval Hearing to Counsel for Defendant and Class

Counsel, postmarked no later than thirty (30) calendar days before the Final 

Approval Hearing.

21. A Class Member who appears at the Final Approval Hearing, either 

personally or through counsel, will be permitted to argue only those matters that 

were set forth in the timely and validly submitted written objection filed by such 

Class Member. No Class Member shall be permitted to raise matters at the Final 

Approval Hearing that the Class Member could have raised in his/her written 

objection, but failed to do so, and all objections to the Agreement that are not set 

forth in a timely and validly submitted written objection are deemed waived unless 

the Class Member can demonstrate good cause for having failed to raise an 

objection in a timely and validly submitted written objection.

Case 3:12-cv-02481-GPC-MDD Document 25 Filed 11/06/13 Page 9 of 10
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

-9-

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION

SETTLEMENT

22. Any Class Member who fails to comply with the applicable provisions 

of the preceding paragraphs concerning their objection shall waive and forfeit any 

and all rights he or she may have to object, appear, present witness testimony, 

and/or submit evidence, shall be barred from appearing, speaking, or introducing 

any testimony or evidence at the Final Approval Hearing, and shall be bound by all 

the terms of the Agreement and by all proceedings, orders and judgments in the 

Litigation.

23. If the Agreement terminates for any reason, the following will occur: 

(a) Class certification will be automatically vacated; (b) Plaintiff will revert to 

functioning as a putative Class representative as if no Class had been certified; and 

(c) this Action will revert to its previous status in all respects as it existed 

immediately before the Parties executed the Agreement. This Order will not waive 

or otherwise impact the Parties' rights or arguments.

24. All discovery and pretrial proceedings and deadlines are stayed and 

suspended until further notice from the Court, except for such actions as are 

necessary to implement the Agreement and this Order

25. The hearing on Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Preliminary 

Approval, currently set for November 15, 2013, at 1:30 p.m., is VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: November 6, 2013

_______________________________

HONORABLE GONZALO P. CURIEL

United States District Court Judge

Case 3:12-cv-02481-GPC-MDD Document 25 Filed 11/06/13 Page 10 of 10