1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR 

THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION

 

In re Peregrine Financial Group 

Customer Litigation 

Civil Action No: 12-cv-5546 

Judge Sara L. Ellis 

Magistrate Judge Daniel G. Martin 

PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS 

ACTION SETTLEMENT AND FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION 

FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES

 Customer Representative Plaintiffs Brian Pannkuk, Jordan Robinson, Joe Martano, 

Marcus Ibrahim, William Robert Evans, III, Gurvaneet Randhawa, and Patricia Benvenuto,1 on 

behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, hereby move for preliminary approval of the 

proposed class-wide settlement with Defendant U.S. Bank, N.A. and Ira Bodenstein (the 

“Trustee”) in his capacity as Chapter 7 Trustee for the estate of Peregrine Financial Group, Inc. 

(“PFG”). In support of their motion, Plaintiffs state as follows: 

1. The proposed settlement mutually resolves claims between Plaintiffs, U.S. Bank, 

N.A., and the Trustee. Pursuant to its terms, U.S. Bank, N.A. will make a cash payment to the 

proposed settlement class of $44.5 million and dismiss with prejudice its appeal of this Court’s 

Order granting final approval of plaintiffs’ settlement with former defendant JP Morgan Chase, 

N.A. 

2. As explained in Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law accompanying this Motion, 

which is incorporated herein by reference, the settlement satisfies the applicable legal 

                                                            

1

 As defined in the Settlement Agreement, the Customer Representative Plaintiffs are Brian 

Pannkuk, Jordan Robinson, Joe Martano, Marcus Ibrahim, William Robert Evans, III, Gurvaneet 

Randhawa, and Patricia Benvenuto. 

Case: 1:12-cv-05546 Document #: 409 Filed: 06/18/15 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:6731
2 

requirements for preliminary approval; the proposed settlement class satisfies the requirements 

of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 for class certification; and the form and manner of notice 

are fair and reasonable. 

3. The proposed settlement is fair, reasonable, and well within the range of possible 

approval as per the factors courts in this Circuit have prescribed for considering preliminary 

approval. 

a. The $44.5 million settlement is an excellent result in light of the strengths, 

weaknesses, and uncertainties of Plaintiffs’ claims. 

b. The complexity, length, and expense of continued litigation weigh in favor 

of settlement. 

c. There is no significant opposition to the settlement, and based on their 

communications with the class representatives, class counsel believe the 

settlement will enjoy broad support. 

d. Class counsel, who are highly experienced in class action and complex 

litigation, believe the Settlement is in the best interests of the settlement 

class. 

e. Class counsel have adequate information to make a fully-informed 

assessment of the settlement based on the substantial discovery and 

motion practice that has occurred over several years of litigation. 

f. The settlement is the result of arm’s-length negotiation, facilitated by a 

former federal judge mediator, and does not unfairly favor Plaintiffs or 

Class counsel. 

Case: 1:12-cv-05546 Document #: 409 Filed: 06/18/15 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:6732
3 

4. All of the Rule 23 requirements for certifying the proposed settlement class are 

met here. 

a. The proposed settlement class includes thousands of individuals and 

entities that are so numerous and dispersed throughout the country that 

joinder would be impracticable. 

b. There are numerous factual and legal issues common to the class, 

including the questions surrounding U.S. Bank’s alleged course of conduct 

involving PFG’s customer segregated account. 

c. The customer representative plaintiffs’ claims are typical of those of the 

class because they arise from the same course of conduct and are based on 

the same legal theories. 

d. The customer representative plaintiffs and class counsel are adequate to 

represent the class, as they have no conflicts of interest with any class 

members and class counsel are well qualified to represent the class. 

e. Common issues predominate over individualized issues (if any), because 

the central liability questions regarding U.S. Bank’s alleged duties to the 

class and any breach of those duties are the same for all Class members 

and would be established at trial using common proof. 

f. A class action is the superior means of resolving this litigation, which 

involves thousands of class members, many of whose claims are relatively 

small compared to the costs of litigation. 

5. The proposed form and manner of providing Notice of the proposed Settlement 

are fair and adequate. The short-form and long-form Notices, attached as Exhibits B-1 and B-2 to 

Case: 1:12-cv-05546 Document #: 409 Filed: 06/18/15 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:6733
4 

the Declaration of Daniel C. Girard filed in support of this Motion, clearly explain the Settlement 

and inform potential Class members of their rights, including their right to opt out of the 

Settlement.2 The manner of distributing notice, by mail and email (as described in the Proposed 

Preliminary Approval Order attached to the Girard Declaration as Exhibit E), represents the best 

means practicable. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter an Order, substantially 

in the form attached to the Girard Declaration as Exhibit E: (1) preliminarily approving the 

Settlement Agreement; (2) certifying the Settlement Class for settlement purposes; (3) approving 

the proposed form and manner of notice; and (4) setting a fairness hearing. 

Dated: June 18, 2015 Respectfully submitted, 

 /s/ Daniel C. Girard 

Daniel C. Girard

Amanda M. Steiner 

David Stein 

Elizabeth A. Kramer 

GIRARD GIBBS LLP 

601 California Street, Suite 1400 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 981-4800 

Facsimile: (415) 981-4846 

Michael C. Dell’Angelo 

Jennifer MacNaughton 

BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C. 

1622 Locust Street 

Philadelphia, PA 19103 

Telephone: (215) 875-3000 

Facsimile: (215) 875-4604 

                                                            

2

 Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, U.S. Bank shall have the right, but not the 

obligation, to withdraw from and terminate the Settlement in its entirety and to render the 

Settlement Agreement null and void in the event that certain opt-out thresholds are met. 

Case: 1:12-cv-05546 Document #: 409 Filed: 06/18/15 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:6734
5 

Norman E. Siegel

STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON LLP 

460 Nichols Road, Suite 200 

Kansas City, Missouri 64112 

Telephone: (866) 714‐7112 

Facsimile: (816) 714‐7101 

Counsel for Plaintiffs 

and the Proposed Class

 

Case: 1:12-cv-05546 Document #: 409 Filed: 06/18/15 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:6735
6 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on June 18, 2015, a copy of the foregoing document was filed 

electronically with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Notice of 

this filing will be sent by email to all parties by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system 

or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic 

Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s CM/ECF System. 

 /s/ Daniel C. Girard 

Case: 1:12-cv-05546 Document #: 409 Filed: 06/18/15 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:6736