IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN RE AUTOMOTIVE PARTS

ANTITRUST LITIGATION

In re: Anti-Vibrational Rubber Parts

In re: Automotive Constant Velocity Joint Boot

Products

Master File No. 2:12-md02311

Hon. Marianne O. Battani

Case No. 2:13-cv-00802

Case No. 2:14-cv-02902

THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:

Automobile Dealership Actions

ORDER GRANTING DEALERSHIP PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY

APPROVAL OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT WITH TOYO DEFENDANTS

PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATION OF SETTLEMENT CLASSES

Upon consideration of Automobile Dealer Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Approval of

Proposed Settlement with Toyo Tire & Rubber Co., Ltd., Toyo Tire North America Manufacturing

Inc., Toyo Tire North America OE Sales LLC, and Toyo Automotive Parts (USA), Inc. (collectively,

“TOYO” or “TOYO Defendants”) and Provisional Certification of Settlement Classes (“Motion”),

it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. The Motion is hereby GRANTED.

Unless otherwise set forth herein, defined terms in this Order shall have the same meaning

ascribed to them in the Settlement Agreement. 

Preliminary Approval of Settlement Agreement

2. The terms of the Settlement Agreement are hereby preliminarily approved, including

the release contained therein, as being fair, reasonable, and adequate to the Settlement Classes,

1

2:14-cv-02902-MOB-MKM Doc # 49 Filed 10/25/17 Pg 1 of 5 Pg ID 969
subject to a Fairness Hearing. The Court finds that the Settlement Agreement was entered into at

arm’s length by experienced counsel and is sufficiently within the range of reasonableness that notice

of the Settlement Agreement should be given, pursuant to a plan to be submitted by Settlement

Classes Counsel and approved by the Court at a later date as provided in this Order.

Class Certification

3. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 23, and in light of the proposed

settlement, the Court hereby finds that the prerequisites for a class action have been met and

provisionally certifies the following classes for settlement purposes (“Settlement Classes”):

(a) “Anti-Vibrational Rubber Parts Settlement Class” is defined as:

All Automobile Dealerships that, during the period from and including March 1,

1996 through September 14, 2017, (a) indirectly purchased Anti-Vibrational Rubber

Parts manufactured by the Defendants or any current or former subsidiary or affiliate

thereof or any co-conspirator, or (b) purchased Vehicles for resale that contained

Anti-Vibration Rubber Parts manufactured by the Defendants or any current or

former subsidiary, affiliate thereof or co-conspirator. Excluded from the Settlement

Class are Defendants, their parent companies, subsidiaries and affiliates, and coconspirators, federal governmental entities and instrumentalities of the federal 

government, states and their subdivisions, agencies and instrumentalities, and

persons who purchased Anti-Vibrational Rubber Parts directly or for resale.

(b) “Automotive Constant-Velocity-Joint Boot Products Class” is defined as:

All Automobile Dealerships that, during the period from and including January 1,

2006 through September 14, 2017, (a) indirectly purchased Automotive ConstantVelocity-Joint Boot Products manufactured by the Defendants or any current or

former subsidiary or affiliate thereof or any co-conspirator, or (b) purchased

Vehicles for resale that contained Automotive Constant-Velocity-Joint Boot

Products manufactured by the Defendants or any current or former subsidiary,

affiliate thereof or co- conspirator. Excluded from the Settlement Class are

Defendants, their parent companies, subsidiaries and affiliates, and co-conspirators,

federal governmental entities and instrumentalities of the federal government, states

and their subdivisions, agencies and instrumentalities, and persons who purchased

Automotive Constant- Velocity-Joint Boot Products directly or for resale.

4. The Court finds that provisional certification of the Settlement Classes is warranted

in light of the Settlement Agreement because: (a) the Settlement Classes are so numerous that

joinder is impracticable; (b) Dealership Plaintiffs’ claims present common issues and are typical of

2

2:14-cv-02902-MOB-MKM Doc # 49 Filed 10/25/17 Pg 2 of 5 Pg ID 970
the Settlement Classes; (c) Dealership Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Counsel (defined below) will

fairly and adequately represent the Settlement Classes; and (d) common issues predominate over any

individual issues affecting the members of the Settlement Classes. The Court further finds that

Dealership Plaintiffs’ interests are aligned with the interests of all other members of the Settlement

Classes. The Court also finds settlement of these actions on a class basis is superior to other means

of resolving the matters.

Appointment of Settlement Class Counsel

5. The Court hereby appoints Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP and Larson King, LLP as

Settlement Class Counsel, having determined that the requirements of Rule 23(g) are fully satisfied

by this appointment.

6. Each Dealership Plaintiff class representative named in the most current Complaint

in each of the above cases will serve as Dealership Plaintiff class representative on behalf of the

Settlement Classes.

Notice to Potential Class Members

7. Prior to the Fairness Hearing, Settlement Classes Counsel shall provide notice of the

Settlement Agreement and the Fairness Hearing to potential class members affected by and/or

entitled to participate in the settlement in compliance with the notice requirements of Rule 23 and

due process of law. Such means of providing notice will be addressed in a subsequent Order

following submission by Dealership Plaintiffs at a later date of a proposal for notice to the

Settlement Classes and related forms for notice, claims and distribution (“Notice Motion”). 

8. The Notice Motion shall include a proposed form of, method for, and date of

dissemination of notice and the date on which the notice is mailed shall be the “Notice Date.”

Other Provisions

3

2:14-cv-02902-MOB-MKM Doc # 49 Filed 10/25/17 Pg 3 of 5 Pg ID 971
9. In the event that the Settlement Agreement is terminated in accordance with its

provisions, the Settlement Agreement and all proceedings had in connection therewith shall be null

and void, except insofar as expressly provided to the contrary in the Settlement Agreement, and

without prejudice to the status quo and rights of Dealership Plaintiffs, TOYO Defendants, and the

members of the Settlement Classes.

10. The Court’s provisional certification of the Settlement Classes as provided herein is

without prejudice to, or waiver of, the rights of any Defendant, including the TOYO Defendants, to

contest certification of any other class proposed in these coordinated actions within 12-md-002311.

The Court’s findings in this Order shall have no effect on the Court’s ruling on any motion to certify

any class in the coordinated actions within 12-md-002311 or on the Court’s ruling(s) concerning any

Defendant’s motion; and no party may cite or refer to the Court’s approval of the Settlement Classes

as persuasive or binding authority with respect to any motion to certify any such class or any

Defendant’s motion.

11. The Court approves the establishment of the Settlement Fund under the Settlement

Agreement as a qualified settlement fund (“QSF”) pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Section 468B

and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, and retains continuing jurisdiction as to any

issue that may arise in connection with the formation and/or administration of the QSF. Settlement

Class Counsel are, in accordance with the Settlement Agreement, authorized to expend funds from

the QSF for the payment of the costs of notice, payment of taxes, and settlement administration

costs.

12. The litigation against Releasees (as defined in the Settlement Agreement with TOYO

Defendants), in particular Toyo Tire & Rubber Co., Ltd., Toyo Tire North America Manufacturing

Inc., Toyo Tire North America OE Sales LLC, and Toyo Automotive Parts (USA), Inc. is stayed

except to the extent necessary to effectuate the Settlement Agreement.

4

2:14-cv-02902-MOB-MKM Doc # 49 Filed 10/25/17 Pg 4 of 5 Pg ID 972
Date: October 25, 2017 s/Marianne O. Battani 

MARIANNE O. BATTANI

United States District Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing Order was served upon counsel of record via the Court's ECF System to their

respective email addresses or First Class U.S. mail to the non-ECF participants on October 25, 2017.

s/ Kay Doaks 

Case Manager

5

2:14-cv-02902-MOB-MKM Doc # 49 Filed 10/25/17 Pg 5 of 5 Pg ID 973