Exhibit E 

 

Case: 1:12-cv-04789 Document #: 76-5 Filed: 11/06/14 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:558
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION 

MISTY MURRAY AND SHAUN MURRAY, ) 

individually and on behalf of a class of ) 

similarly situated individuals, ) 

) 

Plaintiffs, ) No. 12-cv-04789 

) 

v. ) 

) Hon. Sara L. Ellis 

BILL ME LATER, INC., a Delaware corporation, ) 

 ) 

Defendant. ) 

[PROPOSED] FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT 

 This matter coming to be heard on Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of 

Class Action Settlement (“Motion”), due and adequate notice having been given to the Settlement 

Class, and the Court having considered the papers filed and proceedings in this matter, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED as follows: 

1. All capitalized terms in this Final Order and Judgment shall have the same meaning 

as ascribed to them in the Settlement Agreement and Release (“Settlement Agreement”), unless 

otherwise noted. 

2. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Litigation and personal 

jurisdiction over all parties to the Litigation, including all Settlement Class Members. 

3. The Court preliminarily approved the Settlement Agreement by Preliminary 

Approval Order dated July 24, 2014, and adequate notice was given to all members of the 

Settlement Class pursuant to the terms of the Preliminary Approval Order. 

4. The Court has read and considered the papers filed in support of the Motion, 

including the Settlement Agreement and exhibits thereto and supporting declarations. The Court 

Case: 1:12-cv-04789 Document #: 76-5 Filed: 11/06/14 Page 2 of 10 PageID #:559
2

notes that there have been no objections filed with the Clerk of the Court by Settlement Class 

Members. 

5. The Court held a Final Approval Hearing on November 20, 2014, at which time the 

Parties and all other interested persons were afforded the opportunity to be heard in support of and 

in opposition to the Settlement. 

6. Based on the papers filed with the Court and the presentations made to the Court 

by the Parties and other interested persons at the Final Approval Hearing, the Court now gives 

final approval to the Settlement and finds that the Settlement Agreement is fair, adequate, 

reasonable, and in the best interests of the Settlement Class. The complex legal and factual posture 

of the Litigation, and the fact that the Settlement Agreement is the result of arms’ length 

negotiations presided over by a neutral mediator, further support this finding. 

7. Pursuant to Rules 23(c) and 23(b)(3), the Court finally certifies, for settlement 

purposes only, the following Settlement Class: 

All persons who from June 15, 2008 through the date of preliminary 

approval, (a) received a call on their cellular phone made by or on behalf of 

Bill Me Later, Inc. (“BML”) using an automatic telephone dialing system 

and the called party did not give consent for BML to make such a call, or 

(b) received a call on their cellular phone or residential telephone line made 

by or on behalf of BML using an artificial or prerecorded voice to deliver a 

message and the called party did not give consent for BML to make such a 

call. 

8. The persons who made timely and valid requests for exclusion are excluded from 

the Settlement Class and are not bound by this Final Order and Judgment. Annexed hereto as 

Appendix 1 is a schedule of all such persons excluded from the Settlement Class. 

9. For settlement purposes only, Plaintiffs Misty Murray and Shaun Murray are 

hereby appointed as Class Representatives of the Settlement Class. 

Case: 1:12-cv-04789 Document #: 76-5 Filed: 11/06/14 Page 3 of 10 PageID #:560
3

10. For settlement purposes only, the following counsel are hereby appointed as Class 

Counsel: 

Myles McGuire 

Evan M. Meyers 

McGuire Law, P.C. 

161 N. Clark St., 47th Floor 

Chicago, IL 60601 

Michael J. McMorrow 

McMorrow Law P.C. 

One North LaSalle Street, 44th Floor 

Chicago, IL 60604 

11. With respect to the Settlement Class, this Court finds for settlement purposes only 

that: (a) the Settlement Class as defined above is so numerous that joinder of all members is 

impracticable; (b) there are questions of law or fact common to the Settlement Class; (c) the 

claims of the Class Representatives are typical of the claims of the Settlement Class; (d) the 

Class Representatives and Class Counsel have adequately and fairly represented, and will 

continue to adequately and fairly represent, the interests of the Settlement Class; (e) questions of 

law and fact common to the Settlement Class Members predominate over questions affecting 

only individual Settlement Class Members; and (f) certification of the Settlement Class is 

superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy. 

12. The Court has determined that the Class Notice given to the Settlement Class 

Members, in accordance with the Preliminary Approval Order, fully and accurately informed 

Settlement Class Members of all material elements of the Settlement and constituted the best 

notice practicable under the circumstances, and fully satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule 

of Civil Procedure 23, applicable law, and Due Process. 

13. The Court finds that BML properly and timely notified the appropriate state and 

federal officials of the Settlement Agreement pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1715. The Court has 

Case: 1:12-cv-04789 Document #: 76-5 Filed: 11/06/14 Page 4 of 10 PageID #:561
4

reviewed the substance of BML’s notices and accompanying materials, and finds that they 

complied with all applicable requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1715. 

14. The Court orders the Parties to the Settlement Agreement to perform their 

obligations thereunder. The terms of the Settlement Agreement shall be deemed incorporated 

herein as if explicitly set forth and shall have the full force of an order of this Court. 

15. The Court dismisses the Litigation with prejudice and without costs (except as 

otherwise provided herein and in the Settlement Agreement) as to Plaintiffs’ and all Settlement 

Class Members’ claims against BML. The Court adjudges that the Released Claims and all of 

the claims described in the Settlement Agreement are released against the Released Parties. 

16. The Court adjudges that the Plaintiffs and all Settlement Class Members who 

receive a distribution from the Settlement Fund shall be deemed to have fully, finally and forever 

released, relinquished and discharged all Released Claims against the Released Parties, as 

defined by the Settlement Agreement. The Court further adjudges that each Settlement Class 

Member who did not timely and validly request exclusion from the Settlement, but for whatever 

reason does not receive a distribution from the Settlement Fund, has nonetheless received valid 

consideration in the form of the foregone opportunity to receive money, and they shall be 

deemed to have fully, finally and forever released, relinquished and discharged all Released 

Claims against the Released Parties. 

17. The Released Claims specifically extend to claims that Plaintiffs and Settlement 

Class Members do not know or suspect to exist in their favor at the time that the Settlement 

Agreement, and the releases contained therein, become effective. The Court finds that Plaintiffs 

have, and the Settlement Class Members are deemed to have, knowingly waived the protections 

Case: 1:12-cv-04789 Document #: 76-5 Filed: 11/06/14 Page 5 of 10 PageID #:562
5

of California Civil Code § 1542 and any other applicable federal or state statute, case law, rule or 

regulation relating to limitations on releases. 

18. The Court further adjudges that, upon entry of this Order, the Settlement 

Agreement and the above-described release of the Released Claims will be binding on, and have 

res judicata preclusive effect in, all pending and future lawsuits or other proceedings maintained 

by or on behalf of Plaintiffs and all other Settlement Class Members who did not validly and 

timely opt out of the Settlement, and their respective affiliates, assigns, heirs, executors, 

administrators, successors and agents. The Released Parties may file the Settlement Agreement 

and/or this Final Order and Judgment in any action or proceeding that may be brought against 

them in order to support a defense or counterclaim based on principles of res judicata, collateral 

estoppel, release, good faith settlement, judgment bar or reduction, or any other theory of claim 

preclusion or issue preclusion or similar defense or counterclaim. 

19. Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Members who did not validly and timely request 

exclusion from the Settlement are permanently barred and enjoined from asserting, commencing, 

prosecuting or continuing any of the Released Claims or any of the claims described in the 

Settlement Agreement against anyone. 

20. The Court approves payment of attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses to Class 

Counsel in the amount of $____________. This amount shall be paid from the Settlement Fund 

in accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement. The Court, having considered the 

materials submitted by Class Counsel in support of final approval of the Settlement and their 

request for attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses and in response to any timely filed objections 

thereto, finds the award of attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses appropriate and reasonable for the 

following reasons: First, the Court finds that the quantifiable value of the Settlement is at least 

Case: 1:12-cv-04789 Document #: 76-5 Filed: 11/06/14 Page 6 of 10 PageID #:563
6

$9.9 million. The Court therefore considers the Settlement to provide substantial benefits to the 

Settlement Class. Second, the Court finds the payment fair and reasonable in light of the 

substantial work performed by Class Counsel. Third, the Court concludes that the Settlement 

was negotiated at arms’ length without collusion, and that the negotiation of the attorneys’ fees 

only followed agreement on the settlement benefits for the Settlement Class Members. Finally, 

the Court notes that the Class Notice specifically and clearly advised the Settlement Class that 

Class Counsel, as a group, would seek an award in the amount sought. 

21. The Court approves the incentive award of $______________ each for Class 

Representatives Misty Murray and Shaun Murray and specifically finds such amount to be 

reasonable in light of the services performed by Plaintiffs for the Settlement Class, including 

taking on the risks of litigation and helping achieve the results to be made available to the 

Settlement Class. These amounts shall be paid from the Settlement Fund in accordance with the 

terms of the Settlement Agreement. 

22. All checks issued to Settlement Class Members pursuant to the Settlement 

Agreement that are not cashed within 180 days of issuance shall be directed equally to a recipient 

or recipients which the Court will as appropriate cy pres recipients, if necessary. Likewise, to 

the extent there are any funds remaining from the Distributable Settlement Fund, including funds 

associated with uncashed checks mailed to Settlement Class Members and any funds that are not 

or cannot be distributed to Settlement Class Members for any reason, such funds shall be 

directed equally to the same recipients.

23. Neither this Final Order and Judgment nor the Settlement Agreement nor the 

payment of any consideration in connection with the Settlement shall be construed or used as an 

admission or concession by or against BML or any of the Released Parties of any fault, omission, 

Case: 1:12-cv-04789 Document #: 76-5 Filed: 11/06/14 Page 7 of 10 PageID #:564
7

liability, or wrongdoing, or of the validity of any of the Released Claims. This Final Order and 

Judgment is not a finding of the validity or invalidity of any claims in this Litigation or a 

determination of any wrongdoing by BML or any of the Released Parties. The final approval of 

the Settlement Agreement does not constitute any position, opinion, or determination of this 

Court, one way or the other, as to the merits of the claims or defenses of Plaintiffs, the 

Settlement Class Members, or BML. 

24. Any objections to the Settlement Agreement are overruled and denied in all 

respects. The Court finds that no reason exists for delay in entering this Final Order and 

Judgment. Accordingly, the Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to enter this Final Order and 

Judgment. 

25. The Parties, without further approval from the Court, are hereby permitted to 

agree to and adopt such amendments, modifications and expansions of the Settlement Agreement 

and its implementing documents (including all exhibits to the Settlement Agreement) so long as 

they are consistent in all material respects with the Final Order and Judgment and do not limit 

the rights of the Settlement Class Members. 

26. Without affecting the finality of this Final Order and Judgment in any way, the 

Court retains jurisdiction over: (a) implementation and enforcement of the Settlement Agreement 

until the final judgment contemplated hereby has become effective and each and every act agreed 

to be performed by the parties hereto pursuant to the Settlement Agreement have been 

performed; (b) any other action necessary to conclude the Settlement and to administer, 

effectuate, interpret and monitor compliance with the provisions of the Settlement Agreement; 

and (c) all Parties to this Litigation and the Settlement Class Members for the purpose of 

Case: 1:12-cv-04789 Document #: 76-5 Filed: 11/06/14 Page 8 of 10 PageID #:565
8

implementing and enforcing the Settlement Agreement until each and every act agreed to be 

performed by the parties hereto pursuant to the Settlement Agreement have been performed. 

So ordered this ___ day of ______________, 2014. 

 

Hon. Sara L. Ellis 

U.S. District Court Judge 

Case: 1:12-cv-04789 Document #: 76-5 Filed: 11/06/14 Page 9 of 10 PageID #:566
APPENDIX 1 

(Exclusions from Settlement) 

First Name Last Name Address City State Zip 

Raymond Alexander 201 C.O. Circle Lafayette LA 70501 

Prince Auguste 10432 Boynton Place Cir Boynton Beach FL 33437 

Ubaldo Bocanegra 580 Hastings Ln.,N.W. Rochester MN 55901 

Stacie Bowie 21 Bernhard St Hempstead NY 11550 

Clayton Bruton PO Box 163151 Sacramento CA 95816 

Susan Burke 597 Eastern Ave. Barton VT 5822 

Essie Camphor 1007 Class Drive Port Gibson MS 39150 

Jayla Cheng 98 Madison St 12A New York NY 10002 

Paul Deaton 33794 Paradise Ln. Wildomar CA 92595 

Joseph Feeley 138 Woodbridge Buffalo NY 14214 

Latonia Gatlin 4553 Wallace Drive Wallace SC 29596 

Debbie Goulart 43 Sunset Terrace PO Box 893 Brooklyn CT 06234-0893 

Harry Herbst 305 Royal Wood Ct. Vandalia OH 45377-1800 

Nesmar Hernandez URB Metropolis A18 Calle 3 Carolina PR 00987-7402 

Antionette Hopkins 20201 Plymouth Apt 316 Detrot MI 48219 

Klint Huppi 260 East 200 South Millville UT 84326 

Mardi Janse Va Rensburg 10327 Autumnwood Drive Hudson FL 34667 

Karen Killian 7831 N. Mansionette Drive Fresno CA 93720 

Christopher Kopf 6712 Elmwood Ave. Cheyenne WY 82007 

Raymond Longshore 123 Hwy 70 East Glenwood AR 71943 

Mario Mantilla 6633 Bauer Dr. Corpus Christi TX 78411 

Tara McDowd 5013 Old Cliffs Rd San Diego CA 92120 

Diana Miller 5317 Township Rd. 384 Millersburg OH 44654 

Taurean Morrow PO Box 66 Madison AR 72359 

Shawna Murphy 9939 2nd Ave Hesperia CA 92345 

Anna Newson 6506 Seco Blvd Dallas TX 75217 

Tran Nguyen 2855 Senter Rd Spc 78 San Jose CA 95111-1138 

Jurita Ochoa 781 Gore Rd Selah WA 98942 

Maria Rincon 411 SW 1st. St. Morton TX 79346 

Alexis Simmons 328 Windsor Walk Conyers GA 30094 

Rhonda Townson 307 Scotchpine St Mandeville LA 70471 

Glinda Youkhana 3315 Winntka Rd A3 Glenview IL 60026 

Case: 1:12-cv-04789 Document #: 76-5 Filed: 11/06/14 Page 10 of 10 PageID #:567