# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 3- 35 81

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Ja m es Lawren ce M ars ha ll ; J os ep h M ic ha el Sen se r; Da nt e Ant ho ny Past or in i

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s - Ap pe ll an ts

Fred Barn et t; Tracy Si m ie n; Darrel l Al ex an de r Tho m ps on ; J am es Nath an ie l

Bro wn; Mark Greg or y

Cla y to n; Irv in Acie Cro ss ; Br ia n Du nc an ; Bi ll y Jo e Dup ree; Mi ch ael James Hay ne s; Pau l J am es Krau se ; Re gi na ld McKen zi e; Reg in al d J os ep h

Ru ck er; Ja ck ie Laru e Sm it h, on be ha lf of th em se lv es an d al l ot he rs si m il arl y si tu at ed

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s - Ap pe ll ees

Jo hn Fred eri ck Dry er; Elv in Lam on t Be th ea; Edward Alv in W hi te ; Lem ue l J os ep h

Barn ey ; Br uc e All an Laird ; Pr es to n P ears on ; J im Ray Sm it h

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s

v.

Nati on al Fo ot ba ll Leag ue

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 3- 35 82

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Mar cu s Del l Gas ti ne au ; Ab du l Sa la am

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s - Ap pe ll an tsFred Barn et t; Tracy Si m ie n; Darrel l Al ex an de r Tho m ps on ; J am es Nath an ie l

Bro wn; Mark Greg or y

Cla y to n; Irv in Acie Cro ss ; Br ia n Du nc an ; Bi ll y Jo e Dup ree; Mi ch ael James Hay ne s; Pau l J am es Krau se ; Re gi na ld McKen zi e; Reg in al d J os ep h

Ru ck er; Ja ck ie Laru e Sm it h, on be ha lf of th em se lv es an d al l ot he rs si m il arl y si tu at ed

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s - Ap pe ll ees

Jo hn Fred eri ck Dry er; James Lawren ce M ars ha ll ; J os ep h M ic ha el Sen se r; El vi n Lam on t Be th ea; Dant e Ant ho ny Past or in i; Edward Alv in W hi te ; Lem ue l J os ep h

Barn ey ; Br uc e All an Laird ; Pr es to n P ears on ; J im Ray Sm it h

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s

v.

Nati on al Fo ot ba ll Leag ue

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 3- 36 66

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Je d Weav er

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

Fred Barn et t; Tracy Si m ie n; Darrel l Al ex an de r Tho m ps on ; J am es Nath an ie l

Bro wn; Mark Greg or y

Cla y to n; Irv in Acie Cro ss ; Br ia n Du nc an ; Bi ll y Jo e Dup ree; Mi ch ael James Hay ne s; Pau l J am es Krau se ; Re gi na ld McKen zi e; Reg in al d J os ep h

Ru ck er; Ja ck ie Laru e Sm it h, on be ha lf of th em se lv es an d al l ot he rs si m il arl y si tu at ed

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s - Ap pe ll ees

-2

-Jo hn Fred eri ck Dry er; James Lawren ce M ars ha ll ; J os ep h M ic ha el Sen se r; El vi n

Lam on t Be th ea; Dant e Ant ho ny Past or in i; Edward Alv in W hi te ; Lem ue l J os ep h

Barn ey ; Br uc e All an Laird ; Pr es to n P ears on ; J im Ray Sm it h

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s

v.

Nati on al Fo ot ba ll Leag ue

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __

App eal s fr om

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t
fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - Mi nn eap ol is

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Decem

be r 10 , 20 14
Fil ed : M ay

21 , 20 15

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re BYE, SMI TH, and KELLY , Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

BYE, Cir cu it Ju dg e

Si x fo rm er N a ti on al Fo ot ba ll Leag ue ("NFL" ) pl ay ers ("Ap pe ll an ts ") ap pe al

th e di st ric t co ur t's ap pr ov al of th e cl as s- act io n se tt le m en t be twee n ne arl y 25 ,00 0 cl as s

m em be rs an d t he NFL. The ne go ti at ed se tt le m en t agre em en t reso lv es th e li ti ga ti on

su rro un di ng th e NFL's us e of fo rm er NFL pl ay ers ' li ke ne ss es an d id en ti ti es

. The

co m pl ex se tt le m en t— a pr od uc t of nu m ero us se tt le m en t co nf eren ces an d y ears of

li ti ga ti on —p ro vi de s two un iq ue be ne fit s to th e cl as s: (1 ) th e es ta bl is hm en t o f a

li cen si ng ag en cy to as si st fo rm er NFL pl ay ers in m ark et in g th ei r pu bl ic it y rig ht s wit h

th e su pp or t of th e NFL; an d (2 ) up to a $4 2 m il li on pa y ou t by th e NFL fo r th e be ne fit

-3

-of th e cl as s. App el la nt s co nt en d th e di st ric t co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n in ap pr ov in g 1

th e se tt le m en t be cau se it do es no t pr ov id e fo r a di rect fin an ci al pa y m en t to each cl as s

m em be r an d i s n ot fai r, reas on ab le , and ad eq ua te . W e aff irm.

I

The cl as s act io n co m

pl ai nt al le ge s th at fo r m an y y ears NFL Fi lm s— th e

co m m erci al fil m

m ak in g win g of the NFL—h as us ed th e na m es , im ag es , li ke ne ss es ,

an d id en ti ti es of fo rm er NFL pl ay ers in it s va rio us vi d e o s to ge ne rat e rev en ue an d

p r o mo t e th e NFL. The NFL Fi lm s vi de os are "p ro m ot io na l fil m pr od uc ti on s wit h

sc rip ts

, m us ic

, ed it in g, di rect io n an d pr od uc ti on co m pl et el y in de pe nd en t of th e pl ay

an d pro du ct io n of the ga m es th em se lv es ." The y see k t o p ro vi de fan s wi th th e st or y

of th e ga m e, su ch as th e "p ers pe ct iv e of th e ga m e th at pe rh ap s [fan s] were no t aware

of wh e n t h e y watc he d th e br oa dc as t on ne two rk te le vi si on ." Acco rd in g to
App el la nt s, th e us e of th e pl ay ers ' li ke ne ss es an d id en ti ti es ha s he lp ed th e NFL ga in

su bs ta nt ia l p ro fit s an d i m pr ov e it s b ran d.

In 20 09

, App el la nt s br ou gh t th is cl as s a c t i o n ag ai ns t th e NFL on be ha lf of a

cl as s of form er NFL pl ay ers who se na m e, vo ic e, im ag e, or li ke ne ss was us ed by th e

NFL to ga in pr of

it or pr om ot e th e NFL. The cl as s as se rte d c l a im s fo r fal se

en do rs em en t un de r th e Lan ha m Act, 15 U.S.C. § 11 25

, co m m on la w an d st at ut or y rig ht s of pu bl ic it y cl ai m s un de r se ve ral st at es ' la ws, an d un jus t en ric hm en t. The NFL

m ov ed fo r jud gm en t on th e pl ead in gs , co nt en di ng th e cl ai m s fai le d be cau se th ey were

ei th er prec lu de d by th e Fi rs t Am en dm en t, pree m pt ed by th e Co pyrig ht Act, or were

in su ffi ci en t to co ns ti tu te fal se en do rs em en t. At th e pl ead in gs st ag e, th e di st ric t co ur t

de ni ed th e m ot io n, an d th e pa rti es pr oc eed ed to di sc ov ery. Mo re th an two y ears in to

th e li ti ga ti on , th e NFL m ov ed fo r pa rti al su m m ary jud gm en t on i s s u es reg ard in g

The Hon or ab le Pau l A. Mag nu so n, Uni te d St at es D ist ric t Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 1

of Mi nn es ot a.

-4

-ch oi ce of la w an d th e ap pl ic ab le st at ut e of li m it at io ns

. The di st ric t co ur t he ld th at al l

cl ai m s pr io r to Aug us t 23

, 20 03

, were ti m e-b arre d, al l cl ai m s ari si ng be twee n Aug us t

23

, 20 03 , and Aug us t 1 , 20 04 , were g ov ern ed by Mi nn es ot a's st at ut e of li m it at io ns ,

an d th at it was pr e mat ur e to de te rm in e th e ch oi ce of la w an d ap pl ic ab le st at ut e of

li m it at io ns for

all rem ai ni ng cla im s.

On Decem

be r 12

, 20 12

, pu rs ua nt to Fed eral Ru le of Ci vi l Pro ced ur e 23 (d ) an d
(g ), th e Mag is tra te Ju dg e ap po in te d a le ad se tt le m en t co un se l to act as a si n gl e 2

rep res en ta ti ve fo r th e cl as s in se tt le m en t di sc us si on s. See Dry er v. Nat' l Fo ot ba ll

Leag ue , No. 09 -2 18 2 (PAM/ AJB ), Dkt

. No. 25 0, at *1 (D. Mi nn

. Dec. 12

, 20 12 ). The

Mag is tra te Ju dg e ex pl ai ne d th at le ad se tt le m en t co un se l was ne ces sa ry be cau se th e

se tt le m en t di sc us si on s and se tt le m en t pro ces s st al le d du e to "s eri ou s di sa gr eem en ts

am on g th e th ree le ad co un se l fo r Pl ai nt iff s." Id

., Dkt

. No. 25 2, at *1

. The Mag is tra te

Ju dg e ho pe d to "re st art th e se tt le m en t ne go ti at io ns wit ho ut th e di st ract io ns pr es en te d
by Pl ai nt iff

s' co -le ad co un se l's di sa gr eem en ts an d to pr ot ect th e in te res ts of th e

pu ta ti ve cla ss as a who le ." Id . at * 2.

O n Mar ch 18 , 2 01 3, th e pl ai nt iff s fil ed a se co nd am en de d co m pl ai nt , a dd in g

ot he r na m ed pl ai nt iff

s, an d a m ot io n fo r pr e l im in ary ap pr ov al of th e se tt le m en t

ag reem en t. In su m

m ary fo rm , th e co m

pl ex si xt y -p ag e se tt le m en t ag reem en t pr ov id es

fo r th e fo ll owi ng :

(1 ) The crea ti on of th e Co m m on Goo d Ent it y , a no n- pr of it or ga ni zat io n; (2 ) Paym en t of up to $4 2 m il li on by th e NFL to th e Co m m on Goo d

Ent it y ov er ei gh t years;
(3 ) The est ab li sh m en t o f th e Lic en si ng Agen cy ;

The Hon or ab le Arth ur J

. Bo y la n, Uni te d St at es Mag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e 2

Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta , no w ret ire d.

-5

-(4 ) Paym en t of $1 00 ,00 0 wor th of m ed ia va lu e to th e Lice ns in g Age nc y

each y ear u nt il 20 21 ; (5 ) Paym en t o f at to rn ey s' fees an d set tl em en t ad m in is tra ti on ex pe ns es ; (6 ) A res erv e fo r th e NFL's po te nt ia l fee s an d co st s of li ti ga ti on

in vo lv in g c la ss m em

be rs who op t o ut of t he set tl em en t; an d
(7 ) The cl as s m em

be rs ' pe rp et ua l rel eas e of an y cl ai m s an d a ll th ei r

pu bl ic it y rig ht s fo r th e NFL an d i ts rel at ed en ti ti es to us e.

The Co m m on Goo d Ent it y is "d ed ic at ed to su pp or ti ng and pr om oti ng the heal th

an d welf are of Ret ire d P la y ers an d ot he r si m il arl y si tu at ed in di vi du al s." Und er th e

se tt le m en t, th e NFL is o b l i g a t e d to pa y up to $4 2 m il li on ov er ei gh t y ears to th e

Co m m on Goo d Ent it y , whi ch wil l th en di sb ur se th e m on ey to ch ari ta bl e or ga niza tio ns

or he al th an d welf

are or ga ni zat io ns fo r th e be ne fit of cl as s m em be rs

. Dis bu rs em en t

fro m th e Co m

m on Goo d Ent it y m ay on ly be fo r (1 ) m ed ic al res earc h; (2 ) sh or t-t erm

an d lo ng -te rm ho us in g; (3 ) he al th an d de nt al in su ran ce c o v erag e; (4 ) m ed ic al

sc reen in g an d ev al ua ti on s; (5 ) m en ta l he al th pr og ram s; (6 ) well ne ss p r o g r a m s; (7 )

career tra ns it io n pr og ram s; (8 ) an y m ed ic al co st s no t co ve red by he al th in su ran ce; an d
(9 ) ot he r us es as ap pr ov ed by th e Bo ard of Dire ct or s of th e Co m m on Goo d Ent it y

. Afte r te n y ears , an y rem ai ni ng fu nd s in it ia ll y co nt rib ut ed by th e NFL rev ert ba ck to

th e NFL fo r it s ch ari ta bl e us e. The NFL m ay al so de du ct up to $1 3.5 m il li on fro m th e
$4 2 m il li on ob li ga ti on fo r an y ex pe ns es rel at ed to li ti ga ti on in vo lv in g cl as s m em be rs

who op t o ut of t he set tl em en t.

The Lice ns in g Age nc y crea te d by th e se tt le m en t al lo ws fo r on e-s to p sh op pi ng

fo r th os e se ek in g t o p ur ch as e th e pu bl ic it y rig ht s of fo rm er NFL pl ay ers

. Lik e th e

Co m m on Goo d Ent it y , th e Lice ns in g A g e nc y is an or ga ni zat io n wit h a Bo ard of

Dire ct or s th at in cl ud es cl as s m em be rs

. Cl as s m em

be rs m ay pr ov id e au th or iz at io n (o r

wit hd raw it at an y ti m e) fo r th e Li cen si ng Age nc y to li cen se th e pl ay er's pu bl ic it y rig ht s to op po rtu ni ti es i d e n t i f ie d by t he Lice ns in g Age nc y

. The Lice ns in g Age nc y

ha s se le ct ed IMG, on e of th e la rg es t an d m os t su cces sf ul sp or ts m ark et in g fir m s in th e

-6

-w o rld

, to as si st it s op erat io ns an d id en ti fy m ark et in g an d bu si ne ss op po rtu ni ti e s

.

Und er th e se tt le m en t, th e NFL is ob li ga te d to pr ov id e $1 00 ,00 0 wor th of m ed ia va lu e

each y ear un ti l 20 21 fo r th e Lice ns i ng Age nc y 's co m m erci al s. The NFL is al so

ob li ga te d to wor k co op erat iv el y wit h th e Lice ns in g Age nc y fo r refe rral bu si ne ss an d

op po rtu ni ti es an d, in go od fai th as it wou ld wit h an y ot he r li cen se e, pr ov id e an y

po te nt ia l li cen se e of th e Lice ns in g A g e n c y wit h li cen si ng fo r th e NFL sh ie ld

tra de m ark or co pyrig ht ed ga m e fo ot ag e. Pro ceed s fro m th e Lice ns in g Age nc y wil l

be di vi de d be twee n th e Co m m on Goo d Ent it y an d th e cl as s m em be r who se rig ht s are

so ld

, wit h th e cl as s m em be r rece iv in g s e v e n t y- fiv e pe rcen t of th e pr oc eed s. The

Lice ns in g Age nc y is ex pe ct ed to si gn ifi can tl y red uc e tra ns act io n co st s an d un lo ck th e

va lu e o f th e g ro up pu bl ic it y rig ht s o f th e cl as s m em

be rs

.

Afte r a he ari ng , th e di st ric t co ur t pr el im in ari ly ap pr ov ed th e se tt le m en t an d

cert ifi ed th e cl as s un d e r R u l e 23 (b )(3 ). Ove r th e ob jecti on s of se ve ral na m ed
pl ai nt iff s, th e di st ric t co ur t reas on ed th e se tt le m en t was fai r, reas on ab le

, an d ad eq ua te

be cau se it pr ov id ed a " d i r e c t [ ] be ne fit [ to ] th os e in who se na m e th [e] la wsu it was

pu rp or te dl y br ou gh t." Dry er v. Nat'l Fo ot ba ll Leag ue , No. 09 -2 18 2 (PAM/ AJB ), Dkt

. No. 27 0, at *2 (D

. Mi nn

. Apr

. 8, 20 13 ). The co ur t al so reject ed th e no ti on th at th e

se tt le m en t co ns ti tu te d an im pr op er cy pr es di st rib ut io n. Id

. at *4

. Upo n no ti ce to al l

cl as s m em

be rs an d th e ex pi rat io n of th e ex cl us io n an d ob jecti on de ad li ne s, an d aft er

a he ari ng fo r th e fin al ap pr ov al of th e se tt le m en t, th e di st ric t co ur t is su ed it s or de r

ap pr ov in g th e se tt le m en t. W he n th e op t-o ut pe rio d c l o s e d

, ne arl y 25 ,00 0 cl as s

m em be rs rem ai ne d an d 2,0 73 so ug ht to op t ou t. Dry er v. Nat'l Fo ot ba ll Leag ue , No.

0 9

- 2 18 2 (PAM/ AJB ), 20 13 W L 5 88 82 31 , a t *1 (D. Mi nn . No v. 1, 20 13 ). A n o t h e r

th irt y -ei gh t m ad e an un ti m el y re q u e st

, an d on e m or e in ad ve rte nt ly wit hd rew hi s

ex cl us io n req ue st

, al l of who m were ex cl ud ed fro m th e cl as s. Id

. Nin et een m em be rs

fil ed ob jecti on s, se ve n of who m al so req ue st ed to be ex c l u d e d

. Id

. Afte r a

su pp le m en ta l no ti ce was is su ed be cau se of a vi ol at io n of a pr el im in ary in jun ct io n pu t

in pl ace by t he di st ric t co ur t, 15 8 cl as s m em be rs ti m el y wit hd rew th ei r req ue st s fo r

ex cl us io n a nd 6 fi le d u nt im el y req ue st s; all were i nc lu de d i n t he cla ss . Id. at *2

.

-7

-II

"We ge ne ral ly rev ie w fo r ab us e of di sc ret io n a 'di st ric t co ur t's de ci si on to

ap pr ov e [a] gl ob al se tt le m en t ov er' ob jecti on s." In re Upo no r, In c. F1 80 7 Pl um bi ng

Fi tt in gs Pro ds

. Liab

. Lit ig

., 71 6 F.3 d 10 57

, 10 63 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ) (al te rat io n in

or ig in al ) (q uo ti ng In re Bank Am eri ca Co rp . Sec. L it ig

., 35 0 F.3d 74 7, 75 2 (8t h Cir.

20 03 )). "On ly up on th e cl ear sh owi ng th at th e di st ric t co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n wil l

th is co ur t in te rv en e to se t as id e a jud ic ia ll y ap pr ov ed cl as s act io n se tt le m e n t ."
Reynol ds v. Nat'l Fo ot ba ll Le a gu e, 58 4 F.2 d 28 0, 28 3 (8 th Ci r. 19 78 ). W e ha ve

ex pl ai ne d th at co ns id erab le de fere nc e is du e to th e di st ric t c ou rt' s ap pr ov al of a

se tt le m en t:

[The ] de te rm in at io n is co m m it te d to th e so un d di sc r e t i o n of th e tri al jud ge

. Great weig ht is acco rd ed hi s vi ews be cau se he is ex po se d to th e li ti ga nt s, an d t h e i r st rat eg ie s, po si ti on s an d pr oo fs

. He is aware of th e

ex pe ns e an d p os si bl e le ga l bars to su cces s. Sim pl y st at ed , he i s o n t he

fir in g l in e an d c an ev al ua te th e act io n a cco rd in gl y

.

Van Horn v. Tri ck ey , 84 0 F .2d 60 4, 6 06 -0 7 (8 th Cir . 19 88 ) (q uo ti ng Grun in v. In t'l

Hou se of Pan cak es , 51 3 F.2 d 11 4, 12 3 (8 th Ci r. 19 75 )). "A se tt le m en t ag reem en t is
'pr es um pt iv el y va li d.'" In re Upo no r, 71 6 F.3 d at 10 63 (q uo ti ng Lit tl e Ro ck Sch

. Dis t.

v. Pu la sk i C n t y. S p e c ia l Sch

. Dis t. No. 1, 92 1 F.2 d 13 71

, 13 91 (8 th Ci r. 19 90 )).

"[M ]ind fu l of th e li m it ed sc op e of ou r rev ie w

. . . [w]e as k whe th er th e Dis tri ct Co ur t

co n s i d e r ed al l rel ev an t fact or s, whe th er it was si gn ifi can tl y in flu en ced by an

irr el ev an t fact or , an d whe th er in we i g h in g th e fact or s it co m m it te d a cl ear erro r of
jud gm en t." Litt le Ro ck Sch . Dis t., 9 21 F.2d at 1 39 1.

The di st ric t co ur t m ay on ly ap pr ov e a cl as s act io n se tt le m e n t i f i t is "fa ir,

reas on ab le

, an d ad eq ua te ." Fed

. R. Ci v. P. 23 (e)( 2)

. To m ak e th e de te rm in at io n, th e

di st ric t co ur t m

us t co ns id er fo ur fact or s : " (1 ) th e m eri ts of th e pl ai nt iff 's cas e weig he d aga in st th e te rm s of the set tl em en t, (2 ) th e d efen da nt 's fi na nc ia l con di ti on ,

-8

-(3 ) th e co m

pl ex it y an d ex pe ns e of fu rth er li ti ga ti on , an d (4 ) th e am ou nt of op po si ti on

to th e se tt le m en t." In re Upo no r, 71 6 F .3d at 10 63 (q uo ti ng Van Hor n, 84 0 F.2 d at

60 7)

. "Th e si ng le m os t im po rta nt fact or in de te rm in in g whe th er a se tt le m en t is fai r,

reas on ab le

, an d ad eq ua te is a ba la nc in g of th e st ren gt h of th e pl ai nt iff 's cas e ag ai ns t

th e te rm s o f th e se tt le m en t." Van Ho rn , 84 0 F .2d at 6 07

.

Befo re add res si ng th es e fo ur fact or s, we m us t fir st ad dr es s App el la nt s' in it ia l

ch al le ng e th at th e se tt le m en t fai ls as a m at te r of la w. Alt ho ug h th e th ree se ts of

ap pe ll an ts pr es en t th e arg um en ts in va r yi n g w a y s, th ey di st il l to two pr in ci pl ed

arg um en ts : th e se tt le m en t fail s bec au se (1) it do es no t pro vi de an y di rect be ne fit to

th e cl as s; an d (2 ) it m ak es th e fin an ci al pa ym e n t to a th ird -p art y an d no t each cl as s

m em be r di rect ly.

W e be gi n wit h th e gu id in g pr in ci pl e th at "a cl as s act io n se tt le m en t is a pr iv at e

co nt ract ne go ti at ed be twee n th e pa rti es ." In re W ire le ss Tel. Fed

. Co st Rec ov ery Fees

Lit ig

., 39 6 F.3 d 92 2, 93 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ). The co ur t's ro le in rev ie win g a ne go ti at ed

cl as s se tt le m en t is to "t o en su re th at th e ag reem en t is no t th e pr od uc t of frau d or

co ll u s i on an d th at

, ta ke n as a who le

, it is fai r, ad eq ua te

, an d reas on ab le to al l

co nc ern ed ." Id

.

App el la nt s ar gu e th e se tt le m en t fa il s b ecau se it off ers no be ne fit to th e cl as s.

The y at te m

pt to ch arac te riz e th e se tt le m en t as sim pl y gi vi ng away th ei r pr oc eed s to

a th ird -p art y ch ari ty. Pl ai nl y , t h i s i s no t tru e an d th e arg um en t is who ll y wit ho ut

m eri t. As m or e fu ll y di sc us se d be lo w, th e s e tt le m en t ag reem en t pr ov id es fo r two

su bs ta nt ia l an d di rect be ne fit s to th e c l a s s as a who le : th e Lice ns in g Age nc y an d a

pa y m en t o f up to $4 2 m il li on for th e b en efi t o f th e cl as s.

App el la nt s al so arg ue th e se tt le m en t fai ls be cau se th e fin an ci al pa y ou t fo r th e

cl as s is m ad e t h r ou gh a th ird -p art y or ga ni zat io n an d no t di rect ly to each cl as s

m em be r. Bu t we ha ve ne ve r req ui red th at a se tt le m en t ag reem en t sp eci fic al ly pr ov id e

-9

-fo r a di rect fin an ci al pa y m en t t o e a c h cl as s m em be r, an d th e m ere fact th at so m e

m em be r s o f a c l a s s m ay no t rece iv e a di rect pa y m en t is no t di sp os it iv e. See In re

W ire le ss , 39 6 F.3 d at 93 4; se e al so Pet ro vi c v. Am oc o Oil Co

., 20 0 F.3 d 11 40

, 11 46
(8 th Ci r. 19 99 ) ("I t se em s to us th at al m os t ev ery se tt le m e nt wil l in vo lv e di ffer en t

award s fo r va rio us cl as s mem be rs ."). As th e Thi rd Ci rcu it ha s no te d, "s om e co ur ts

al lo w a se tt le m en t to req ui re a pa y m en t on ly to a th ird pa rty, th at is

, to pr ov id e no

reco ve ry at al l di rect ly to cl as s m em be rs ." In re Bab y Pro ds

. Ant it ru st Lit ig

., 70 8

F.3 d 16 3, 17 2 (3 d Ci r. 20 13 ) (q uo ti ng Am eri can Law In st it ut e ("ALI" ), Pri nc ip le s of

th e Law of

Agg reg at e Lit ig . § 3 .07 , com m en t a ( 20 10 )).

In th is cas e, we do no t ne ed to de ci de if, or un de r wha t ci rcu m st an ces , pa rti es

to a cl as s- act io n set tl em en t m ay ag ree to pr ov id e a pa y m en t to a th ird pa rty wit ho ut

a d i r ect be ne fit to cl as s m em be rs

. Here, th e fin an ci al pa y m en t to th e th ird -p art y

or ga n i z a t i on is no t th e on ly, or pe rh ap s ev en th e pr im ary, be ne fit of th e se tt le m en t

ag reem en t. All cl as s m e mb e r s rece iv e a di rect be ne fit fro m th e se tt le m en t: th e

op po rtu ni ty to li cen se th ei r pu bl ic it y rig ht s thr ough the es ta bli she d L ic en sin g A genc y ,

as well as th e pa y m en ts by th e NFL to th e Lice ns in g Age nc y

. If th e pl ay ers ' pu bl ic it y rig ht s are as va lu ab le as App el la nt s cl ai m , th e pl aye r s s h o ul d be ab le to real iz e th e

va lu e of th ei r pu bl ic it y rig ht s th ro ug h th e Lice ns in g Age nc y

. W hi le t h e pa rti es

di sa gr ee on th e va lu e o f t h e Li c e ns in g Age nc y to th e di ffer en t cl as s m em be rs , th e

di st ric t co ur t he ld th at th ro ug h th e Lice ns in g Age nc y cl as s m em be rs "fi na ll y ha [d ] an

av en ue to pu rs ue co m

m erci al in te res ts in th ei r own im ag es

. . . [an d] fo r th e fir st ti m e

in co nju nc ti on wit h th e NFL's co pyri g h t s an d tra de m ark s." Dry er, 20 13 W L

58 88 23 1, at *1

. Thu s, ev en in th e ab se nc e of an y fin an ci al pa y ou t, th e se tt l e men t

wou ld no t fai l as a m at te r of la w. See, e.g ., In re Mex ic o Mo ne y Tran sf er Lit ig

., 26 7

F.3 d 74 3, 74 8 (7 th Ci r. 20 01 ) (n ot in g th at th e se tt le m en t was "o n e of m an y cl as s

act io ns in whi ch ev eryone ot he r th an th e pl ai nt iff s ha s be en pa id in cas h," th at th is

was "en ou gh to rai se su sp ic io ns " th at th e se tt le m en t m ay no t be fai r, bu t th at th e co ur t

m us t "as k whe th er th e va lu e of rel ie f in th e ag gr eg at e is a reas on ab le ap pr ox im at io n

of th e va lu e of pl ai nt iff

s' cl ai m "); In re Gen

. Mo to rs Co rp

. Pi ck -Up Truc k Fu el Tan k

-1 0-Pro ds . Liab . Liti g., 5 5 F .3d 76 8, 8 03 (3d Cir . 19 95 ) (n ot in g c on cern th at set tl em en t

m ay no t be fai r be cau se it "i nv ol ve [ d ] o n l y no n- cas h rel ie f")

. Thi s is no t a cas e in

whi ch th e di st ric t co ur t ap pr ov ed a se tt le m en t wit h no di rect be ne fit to ea ch cl as s

m em be r.

Fu rth erm or e, al th ou gh th e $4 2 m il li on i s no t pa id di rect ly to cl as s m em be rs ,
t h e mon ey is cl earl y de si gn at ed fo r th e be ne fit of th e cl as s. The Co m m on G o o d

Ent it y is ob li ga te d to "ad m in is te r th e [m on ey ] co ns is te nt wit h th e pr ov is io ns of [th e]

Set tl em en t Agree m en t" fo r th e b en efi t o f cl as s m em be rs . In t hi s way, the Co m m on

Goo d Ent it y 's ad m in is tra ti on of th e su bs ta nt ia l fin an ci al pa yo u t i s n ot un li ke th e

es ta bl is hm en t of a tru st fo r th e be ne fit of th e cl as s, whi ch co ur ts ha ve freq ue nt ly

fo un d pe rm is si bl e. See, e.g ., Co be ll v. Sal azar , 67 9 F.3 d 90 9, 91 4 (D.C. Ci r. 20 12 );

In re Diet Dru gs Pro ds . Li ab . Li ti g., No. 1 4

- 2 7 2 9

, 2 01 5 W L 7 58 45 5, at *1 (3 d Ci r.

Feb

. 24

, 20 15 ); In t'l Uni on , Uni te d Aut o., Aero sp ace, an d Agr ic

. Im pl em en t W or ke rs

of Am

., 49 7 F.3d 61 5, 62 4 (6t h Cir. 20 07 ); Fan ni ng v. Un it ed Sta te s, 3 46 F.3 d 38 6,

39 0 (3 d Ci r. 20 03 ); Nat'l Treas ur y Em ps

. Uni on v. Uni te d St at es , 54 Fed

. Cl

. 79 1, 79 5
(Fed

. Cl

. 20 02 ). The refo re, we do no t be li ev e th e m ere fact th at th e fin an ci al pa y ou t

fo r t h e b e ne fit of th e cl as s is m ad e th ro ug h a th ird pa rty ren de rs th e se tt le m en t

im pe rm is si bl e. The rel ev an t qu es ti on is fo r who m th e m on ey wil l be us ed

, no t who se

na m e ap pe ars on th e ch eck

. App el la nt s ci te to no au th or it y ho ld in g to th e co nt rary.

Rat he r, th ey rel y on cas es i nv ol vi ng cy pr es di st rib ut io ns in whi ch a di st ric t co ur t

or de rs th e pa y m en t of an y un cl ai med cl as s fu nd s to a th ird -p art y

. Here, we de al no t 3

At th e di st ric t co ur t, th e ob jecti ng cl as s m em

be rs arg ue d th e se tt le m en t 3

ag reem en t co ns ti tu te d a cy pr es di st rib ut io n. On ap pe al

, no on e ex pr es sl y arg ue s th e

se tt le m en t is act ua ll y a cy pr es di st rib ut io n, an d on e se t of ap pe ll an ts s p e ci fic al ly

st at es th ey "wh ol eh eart ed ly ag ree" wit h th e di st ric t cou rt th at th e se tt le m en t is no t a

cy p re s di st rib ut io n.

"Th e cy pr es do ct rin e or ig in at ed as a ru le of co ns tru ct io n to sa ve a te st am en ta ry ch ari ta bl e gi ft th at wou ld ot he rwis e fai l, al lo win g 'th e ne xt be st us e of th e fu nd s to

sa ti sf y th e te st at o r ' s in te nt as ne ar as po ss ib le .'" In re Airl in e Tick et Co m m 'n

-1 1-wit h th e co ur t's au th or it y to di st rib ut e u nc la im ed fun ds to a th ird pa rty un rel at ed to

th e cl as s bu t th e p a r t i e s ' a b il it y to de ci de ho w t o be st di st rib ut e fu nd s reco ve red in

a cl as s ac ti on for th e b en efi t o f th e cl as s.

Co ur ts ha ve sp eci fic al ly fo un d se tt le m en t ag reem en ts wit h a st ru ct ur e si m il ar

to th e on e i n t h i s cas e as a pe rm is si bl e an d fav or ab le way to res ol ve co m pl ex

li ti ga ti on di sp ut es

. Fo r ex am pl e, in Lan e v. Face bo ok

, th e pl ai nt iff s br ou gh t a cl as s

a c ti on ag ai ns t Face bo ok an d ot he r co rp or at e en ti ti es fo r Face bo ok 's im pr op e r

pu bl is hi ng of p riv at e in fo rm at io n re ga rd in g wha t it s m em be rs di d e ls ewh ere o n t he

In te r n e t

. 6 96 F.3 d 81 1, 81 6 (9 th Ci r. 20 12 ), cert de ni ed

, 13 4 S. Ct

. 8 (2 01 3)

. Sp eci fic al ly, n um ero us co m pa ny web si te s rep or te d cert ai n act iv it y by cu st om ers to

Face bo ok ; Face bo ok th en pu bl is h e d t h e act iv it y on th e m em be r's pr of il e pa ge an d

br oa dc as t i t fo r ot he rs to se e. Id

. The pa rti es se tt le d th e cl as s- act io n la wsu it un de r

a se tt le m en t ag reem en t th at req ui red Face bo ok to p a y $9 .5 m il li on , f ro m whi ch th e

22 na m ed cl as s m em

be rs rece iv ed a to ta l of $3 9,0 00

, th e 3,6 63 ,63 2 un na m ed cl as s

m em be rs rece iv ed no pa y

m en ts at al l, an d th e m ajor it y of fu nd s wen t to es ta bl is hi ng

a ne w ch ari ta bl e fo un da ti on th at wou ld he lp fu nd ot he r or ga ni zat io ns de di cat e d t o

ed uc at in g t he pu bl ic ab ou t o nl in e p riv acy. Id. a t 8 17

.

Ant it ru st Lit ig

., 26 8 F.3 d 61 9, 62 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 01 ) (q uo ti ng Dem oc rat ic Cen t. Co m m

.

v. W as hi ng to n Met ro

. Area Tran si t Co m m 'n, 84 F.3 d 45 1, 45 5 n.1 (D.C. Ci r. 19 96 )).

In cl as s- act io n li ti ga ti on , it is co m m on ly us ed to refe r to th e di st rib ut io n of an y

un cl ai m ed cl as s fu nd s. Cf. In re Ban kAm eri ca Co rp

. Sec. Lit ig

., 77 5 F.3 d 10 60

, 10 63 (8 th Ci r. 20 15 ) ("I n re cen t years, fe de ral di st ric t co ur ts ha ve di sp os ed of u nc la im ed
cl as s a c t i o n s et tl em en t fu nd s aft er di st rib ut io ns to th e cl as s by m ak in g ' cy pr es di st rib ut io ns .'"); Kli er v. Elf Ato ch em N. Am

., In c., 65 8 F.3 d 46 8, 47 5 (5 th Ci r. 20 11 ). The se tt le m en t ag reem en t he re di d no t pr ov id e fo r—n or di d th e di st ric t co ur t
di rect —t ha t an y un cl ai med m on ey be pa id ou t to a no n- cl as s m em be r. The refo re, we do no t be li ev e th e se tt le m en t ag reem en t is a cy pr es di st rib ut io n m erel y be cau se pa rt
of th e be ne fit th ro ug h th e se tt le m en t a g r e e ment is of fere d th ro ug h a th ird -p art y

or ga ni zat io n.

-1 2-The st ru ct ur e of th e se tt le m en t ag reem en t in Lan e wa s in m an y way s si m il ar

to th e se tt le m en t in th is cas e: it pr ov id ed no di rec t f i n a n c i a l pa y ou t to al l cl as s

m em be rs , sa v e th e na m ed pl ai nt iff s, an d it pa id th e cl as s fu nd s to a ne wly-creat ed

no n- pr of it or ga ni zat io n. It als o di ffer ed in at le as t two key res pe ct s. Fi rs t, the no npr of it or ga ni zat io n in Lan e was no t ob li ga te d to sp en d an y of th e fu nd s it rece iv ed fo r

th e be ne fit of an y cl as s m em be rs , whi ch th e co ur t fo un d m ad e it a cy pr es

di st rib ut io n. Co nv ers el y , th e Co m m on Goo d Ent it y is bo un d to di sb ur se th e fin an ci al

pa y ou t by th e NFL fo r th e be ne fit of th e cl as s un de r sp eci fic al ly id en ti fie d pu rp os es

. Seco nd

, th e cl as s m em

be rs in Lan e rece iv ed no di rect be ne fit wha ts oe ve r—f in an ci al

or ot he rwis e. In co nt ras t, ev en se tt in g as id e th e be ne fit of th e $4 2 m il li on pa y ou t, al l

cl as s m em

be rs he re re cei ve d t he be ne fit of t he Lice ns in g Ag en cy

.

The se tt le m en t ag reem en t in th is cas e pr ov id ed fo r a di rect be ne fit to al l cl as s

m em be rs an d a su bs ta nt ia l fin an ci al pa y m en t by th e NFL fo r t h e b e n e f it of cl as s

m em be rs

. W e d o no t be li ev e it fai ls as a m at te r of la w m erel y be cau se it do es no t

pr ov id e a sp eci fic fin an ci al pa y ou t to each cl as s m em be r or be cau se t h e fin an ci al

pa y m en t is m ad e th ro ug h a th ird -p art y or ga ni zat io n. The se tt le m en t a gr eem en t 4

W e al so reject App el la nt s' arg um en t th at th e di st r i c t co ur t's ap pr ov al of th e 4

se tt le m en t v io la te s t he Ru le s En ab li ng Act, co di fie d i n 2 8 U.S.C. § 20 72

.

Und er th e Ru le s Ena bl in g Act, th e Fed eral Ru le s of Ci vi l Pro ced ur e "s ha ll no t
ab rid ge , en la rg e or m od if y a n y s u b s t an ti ve rig ht ." 28 U.S.C. § 20 72 (b ). Thu s, a di s t r i c t c ou rt, ge ne ral ly, m ay no t award su bs ta nt iv e rel ie f in a cl as s- act io n la wsu it

m erel y be ca u s e i t i s b r ou gh t in th e co nt ex t of a cl as s act io n. Howev er, App el la nt s

pr es en t no cas e ho ld in g t ha t th e Ru le s Ena bl in g Act li m it s th e type of rel ie f pa rti es th em se l v e s m ay ag ree to

, so lo ng as th e co ur t rem ai ns co nv in ced th e se tt le m en t is

"fa ir, reas on ab le

, an d ad eq ua te ." As no te d ab ov e, a cl as s- act io n se tt le m en t— li ke an y

se tt le m en t— is a pr iv at e co nt ract of ne go ti at ed co m pr om is es . The ag reem en t i s n ot

a "s ub st an ti ve ad

jud ic at io n of th e un de rlyin g cau se s of act io n," an d th eref or e,

ap pr ov al of th e se tt le m en t ag reem en t do es no t im pl ic at e th e Ru le s Ena bl in g Act. See

In re B a b y Pro ds ., 7 08 F.3 d at 17 3 n.8 ("B ecau se a di st ric t co ur t's cert ifi cat io n of a

se tt le m en t si m

pl y r e c o gn iz es th e pa rti es ' de li be rat e de ci si on to bi nd th em se lv es

-1 3-pa ss ed th e di st ric t co ur t's sc ru ti ny, an d we fin d no ev id en ce wha ts oe ve r th at th e co ur t

fai le d to fu lfi l it s du ty to se rv e as a gu ard ia n fo r th e rig ht s of th e a b s e n t cl as s

m em be rs

. Acco rd in gl y , we co ns id er whe th er th e di st ric t co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n

in fin di ng th e se tt le m en t ag reem en t fai r, reas on ab le

, an d ad eq ua te un de r th e

tra di ti on al fou r-fa ct or an al y si s.

A - The Def

en da nt 's Fi na nc ia l Co nd it io n

The di st ric t c o u r t fo un d th at th e NFL is in go od fin an ci al st an di ng , whi ch

wou ld pe rm it it to ad eq ua te l y pa y fo r it s se tt le m en t ob li ga ti on s or co nt in ue wit h a

sp iri te d def

en se in th e li ti ga ti on

. No pa rty di sa gr ees wit h th is fin di ng

. As su ch

, we

fin d t hi s fa ct or ne ut ral

.

B - The Co m

pl ex it y an d Ex pe ns e o f Fu rth er Lit ig at io n

Cl as s act io ns , in ge ne ral

, "p la ce an en or m ou s bu rd en of co st s an d ex pe ns e up on [] pa rti es ." Sch m id t v. Fu ll er Bru sh Co

., 52 7 F.2 d 53 2, 53 5 (8 th Ci r. 19 75 ). W he re,

as he re, th e cl as s m em

be rs ' cl ai m s in vo lv e co m

pl ex le ga l qu es ti on s, co nf li ct s of la w

an al y se s, th e ap pl ic at io n of nu m ero us st at e s ' l a w s, an d in di vi du al iz ed da m ag es fo r

each cl as s m em

be r th at are sp ecu la ti ve an d di ffi cu lt to es ti m at e, th e en or m it y of th e

bu rd en is ob vi ou s.

acc o r d in g to m

ut ua ll y ag reed -u po n te rm s wit ho ut en ga gi ng in an y su bs ta nt iv e ad jud ic at io n of th e un de rlyin g cau se s of act io n, we do no t be li ev e th e in cl us io n of a

c y pr es pr ov is io n in a se tt le m en t ru ns co un te r to th e Ru le s Ena bl in g Act." (in te rn al

qu ot at io n m ark s an d ci ta ti on om it te d) ); Su ll iv an v. DB In vs ., In c., 66 7 F.3 d 27 3, 31 2 (3 d Ci r. 20 11 ) (en ba nc ) ("[ T] he pr op os ed se tt le m en t c ou ld no t vi ol at e th e Ru le s Ena bl in g Act s i n c e a co ur t's ap pr ov al of a vo lu nt ary se tt le m en t, by na tu re a

co m pr om is e of rig ht s, do es no t affe ct su bs ta n t i v e st at e rig ht s." (in te rn al qu ot at io n

m ark s om it te d) ); cf. Kli er, 65 8 F.3 d at 48 2 (J on es , J. co nc ur rin g) (s ug ge st in g th at cy

pr es di st rib ut io ns m ay vi ol at e th e Ru le s Ena bl in g Act whe n " ju dg es aw ar d su rp lu s

se tt le m en t fu nd s t o c ha rit ie s an d c iv ic org an iz at io ns " (empha si s ad de d) ).

-1 4-Befo re s et tl in g, th e pa rti es ha d alre ad y sp en t t hr ee years i n l it ig at io n a nd ha d

no t ye t e v e n a c hi ev ed cl as s cert ifi cat io n. As di sc us se d in m or e de ta il be lo w, th e

res ol ut io n of th e pu bl ic it y rig ht s cl ai m s wou ld ha ve req ui red tre m en do us effo rts

reg ard in g is su es of st at ut es of li m it at io n fo r th e va rio us cl as s m em be rs ' ho m e st at es ,

co m pl ex co nf

li ct of l a w s an al y se s in vo lv in g m ul ti pl e st at es , th e ap pl ic at io n of

nu m ero us st at es ' co m

m on an d st at ut or y pu bl ic it y rig ht s la ws , a f fir m at iv e de fen se s

in vo lv in g co ns ti tu ti on al pr in ci pl es , an d th e r e v ie w of each in di vi du al pl ay er's

co nt ract

.

Eve n whe n th e ap pl ic ab le la w fo r each of th e ne arl y 25 ,00 0 cl as s m em be rs was

de te rm in ed

, th e effo rt wou ld ha ve on ly be ga n, as th e pa rti es wou ld ha ve vo ci fero us ly

di sp ut ed an d fo ug ht ov er th e am ou n t o f d a mag es to whi ch each cl as s m em be r was

en ti tl ed

. Each cl as s m em be r's li ke ne ss w as us ed in va ry in g NFL Fi lm s' vi de os , in

va ry in g freq ue nc y du rin g th os e vi de os , an d in va ry in g fo cu s. The di sc ov ery

as so ci at ed wit h de te rm in in g th is wou ld h a v e be en su bs ta nt ia l to sa y th e le as t.

Fu rth erm or e, each cl as s m em be r's no to rie ty an d reco gn it io n al so va rie s. Thu s, on ce

th e pa rti es id en ti fie d an d is ol at ed each cl as s m em be r's ap pe aran ces in th e vi de os , th ey

wou ld ha ve ha d to pr es en t ev id en ce reg ard in g wha t th ey be li ev ed su ch ap pe aran ce

m eri te d in va lu e. Und ou bt ed ly, each pa rty wou ld ha ve ob t a i n e d co m pe te nt an d

q u a l i f i ed (an d ex pe ns iv e) ex pe rts to pr ov id e an ev al ua ti on on wha t each pl ay er' s

ap pe aran ce du rin g th e va ry in g NFL Fi lm s' vi de os wa s wor th

, bu t gi ve n th e

sp ecu la ti ve en de av or of su ch a ta sk

, th e e f f o r t to reac h an am ou nt of da m ag es fo r

each cl as s m em

be r—t o be pe rs ua si ve —wo ul d ha ve be en su bs t a nt ia l. Mu lt ip lying

th at for th e n earl y

25 ,00 0 c la ss m em

be rs up gr ad es it to Hercu le an

. 5

App el la nt s arg ue th at

, un de r res ti tu ti on ary pr in ci pl es , da m ag es can si m pl y be 5

cal cu la te d by de te rm in in g th e am ou nt of ga in th e NFL rece iv ed by us in g th e fo rm er pl ay ers ' li ke ne ss es

. Eve n as su m in g th at se pa rat in g th e va lu e of th e pl ay ers ' li ke ne ss es fro m th e crea ti ve pr es en ta ti on an d ot he r un iq ue el em en ts of th e NFL F i l m s' vi de os

wou ld be a m or e si m

pl is ti c ta sk

, reg ard le ss of ho w th e da m ag es fo r al l fo rm er pl ay ers '
cl ai m s are cal cu la te d in th e co ll ect iv e, to al lo cat e th e pr oc eed s each in di vi du al pl ay er

-1 5-F i n a l l y, as th e di st ric t co ur t reco gn iz ed

, th e fact th at th e NFL sp eci fic al ly

ret ai ne d $1 3.5 m il li on a s a res erv e fo r an y li ti ga ti on res ul ti ng fro m op t-o ut s is

st ro ng ly in di cat iv e th at th e real su m fo r th e cl as s- act io n li ti ga ti on , pa rti cu la rly fo r th e pl ai nt iff s who carr ie d th e bu rd en of pr ov in g th ei r da m ag es , wo ul d h av e be en m uc h

hi gh er.

The refo re, th e di st ric t co ur t co rrec tl y reas on ed th at th is fact or he av il y fav or s

ap pr ov al of t he set tl em en t ag reem en t.

C - Am ou nt of Op po si ti on to th e Set tl em en t

The weig ht of th is fact or de pe nd s up on th e vi ewp oi nt of th e op po si ti on

. W he n

th e op po si ti on is co ns id ered fro m th e vi e w o f t he na m ed pl ai nt iff s, th e am ou nt is

co ns id erab le : si x of th e twen ty-th ree cl as s rep res en ta ti ve s ob jecte d to th e se tt le m en t.

W he n co ns id ere d f

r o m t h e vi ewp oi nt of th e en ti re cl as s, it is no t su bs ta nt ia l— le ss

th an te n pe rcen t of th e cl as s op te d ou t of th e se tt le men t

. W e ha ve pr ev io us ly

ap pr ov ed cl as s- act io n se tt le m en ts ev en whe n al m os t ha lf th e cl as s ob jecte d to it

. See,

e.g ., VanHo rn , 84 0 F.2d at 60 6 (1 80 of 4 00 in m at es ob jecti ng ). W e h av e ap pr ov ed

a cl as s- act io n se tt l e men t e v e n whe n al l na m ed pl ai nt iff s op po se d it

. See Ell io tt v. Sp erry Ran d Co rp ., 68 0 F.2 d 12 25

, 1 2 2 6

- 2 7 ( 8 t h Ci r. 19 82 ) (fi nd in g no ab us e of

di sc ret io n ev en th ou gh bo th na m ed pl ai nt iff s ob jecte d to it an d 79 0 of ap pr ox im at el y 3,0 00 m em

be rs ob jecte d)

. W hi le App el la nt s fau lt th e di st ric t co ur t fo r fai li ng to ag ree

wit h th em , it is cl ear th e di st ric t co ur t li st en ed to al l o f th ei r ob jecti on s, care fu ll y

co ns id ered th em , and ex pl ai ne d i ts rat io na le for reject in g t he m

.

The fact th at a co ns id erab le nu m be r o f th e na m ed pl ai nt iff s ob jecte d to th e

se tt le m en t su gg es ts it m ay no t ha ve be en pa rti cu la rly fav or ab le to wha t th ey be li ev ed

is en ti tl ed

, th e co ur t wou ld st il l ne ed to de te rm in e each pl ay er's en ti tl em en t ba se d on th e u se an d v al ue of h is li ke ne ss in di vi du al ly.

-1 6-th ei r pa rt ic ul ar cl ai m s wer e wor th

. The fact th at le ss th an te n pe rcen t of th e en ti re

cl as s op te d ou t of th e se tt le m en t— de sp it e co ns ci ou s effo rts by so m e cl as s m em be rs

to pe rs ua de th e ot he r cl as s m em be rs of un fai rn es s— su gg es ts it was fav or ab le to wha t

m os t m em

be rs be li ev ed th ei r cl ai m s were wor th

. The na m ed pl ai nt iff s were li ke ly

so m e o f th e in di vi du al s wh o by s et tl in g were gi vi ng up th e g reat es t p ot en ti al di rect

fin an ci al pa y ou t. Bu t th ey were n o t req ui red to fo rg o wha t th ey be li ev ed to be

m eri to rio us cl ai m s— th ey co ul d ha ve op te d ou t of th e se tt le m en t to pu rs ue th ei r own

cl ai m s, as so m e cl as s m em be rs di d.

The di st ric t co ur t was ke en ly awar e of it s ro le to ser ve as t he gu ard ia n of th e

ab se nt cl as s m em

be rs , whi ch was "es pe ci al ly im po rta nt [in th is cas e], gi ve n th e

rh et or ic an d co nf

li ct am on g th e memb e r s o f th e Set tl em en t Cl as s, who in th e us ua l

cas e wou ld be zeal ou sl y pr ot ect in g t ho se rig ht s." Dr y er, 20 13 W L 5 88 82 31 , a t *2

. It is ob vi ou s th at in ap pr ov in g th e se tt le m en t, th e d i s t r ic t co ur t ov erwh el m in gl y

be li ev ed th e s e t t l e men t was fai r, reas on ab le

, an d ad eq ua te fo r th e m ajor it y of th e

cl as s, wh ic h h ap pe ne d t o b e th e q ui et , abs en t m ajor it y :

[T]he ob jecto rs wan t a fin an ci al pa y ou t m or e th an th ey wan t to em br ace th e real it y of th e li m it at io ns of t he ir c la im s. Fo rtu na te ly fo r th e ab se nt
cl as s m em

be rs , ex pe rie nc ed co unsel an d a know le dge able an d ex tre m el y

cap ab le Mag is tra te Ju dg e sa w t he cas e fo r wha t it was , a nd ne go ti at ed

a se tt le m en t th at is tru ly on e-o f-a- ki nd

, an d a rem ark ab le vi ct or y fo r th e cl as s as a who le

.

Id

. The di st ric t co ur t refu se d to gi ve cred en ce to th e vo cal m in or it y th at fo cu se d on

rece iv in g a di rec t fin an ci al pa y ou t, whi ch th e di st ric t co ur t be li ev ed was a "v ery

m is ta ke n be li ef th at th ey co ul d reap si gn ifi can t fin an ci al be ne fi ts fro m co nt in ui ng th is

cas e." Id

. In de ed

, th e co ur t ap tl y no te d th at "o nl y on e-t en th of on e pe rcen t of th e

cl as s ob jecte d, an d le ss th an te n per cen t of the cl as s ha [d ] req ue st ed ex cl us io n fro m

th e se tt le m en t." Id

. Thi s w a s i n acco rd wit h th e di st ric t co ur t's "d ut y to th e si le nt

m ajor it y as we ll as t he vo cal m in or it y ." In re Wirel es s, 3 96 F.3d at 9 33

.

-1 7-Und er th e sp eci fic ci rcu m st an ces of th e cl as s cl ai m s an d di sp ari ty in th e

po te nt ia l pa y ou t fo r in di vi du al da m ag es at is su e in th is cas e, an d th e po st ur e in whi ch

th ey were li ti ga te d, we be li ev e th e am ou nt of op po si ti on fro m th e su bs ta nt ia l ab se nt

m ajor it y is be tt er in di cat iv e of th e op po si ti on to t he se tt le m en t as a who le

. Acco rd in gl y , we fin d t hi s fa ct or , to o, fa vo rs ap pr ov al of t he set tl em en t ag reem en t.

D - The M eri ts of t he Pla in ti ffs ' Cas e Weigh ed Agai ns t t he Term s o f th e

Set tl em en t

The m os t im

po rta nt co ns id erat io n in th e an al y si s req ui res ba la nc in g th e

st ren gt h of th e pl ai nt iff

s' cas e ag ai ns t th e va lu e of th e se tt le m en t te rm s to th e cl as s.

The di st ric t co ur t he ld "t he re is no qu es ti on th at th e fact or weig hs he av il y in fav or of

th e se tt le m en t." Dry er, 2 01 3 WL 58 88 23 1, at *4

.

1 - Th e Me rit s o f th e Pl ai nt iff s' C as e

The di st ric t co ur t he ld "t he ch an c e s t h at th is la wsu it —o r in de ed an y

cl as s- act io n la wsu it se ek in g to rec o u p s u ms fo r th e al le ge d in fri ng em en t of fo rm er

NFL pl ay ers ' pu bl ic it y rig ht s by NFL Fi lm s— wil l su ccee d are sl im at be st " be cau se "[t ]oo m an y ob st acl es st an d in th e way of th at su cces s." Id. at *2 . Th os e ob st acl es

co m e in th e fo rm of fo ur ba rri ers : (1 ) st at ut e of li m it at io ns ; (2 ) is su es rel at ed to cl as s

cert ifi cat io n; (3 ) pl au si bl e affi rm at iv e de fen se s; an d (4 ) la ck of su bs ta nt ia l da m ag es

fo r m os t o f th e cl as s.

Fi rs t, be cau se of th e si x- y ear st at ut e of li m it at io ns "n o Pl ai nt iff [was ] en ti tl ed

to co m pe ns at io n fo r an y un au th or iz ed us e of hi s im ag e be fo re 20 03 ." Id

. at *4

. Thu s,

"t he st at ut e of li m it at io ns wou ld ba r th e cl ai m s of m an y m em be rs ." I d

. N o on e

di sp ut es th is li m it at io n.

-1 8-Seco nd

, th e di s tri ct co ur t co nv in ci ng ly ex pl ai ne d it s m an y co nc ern s wit h

po te nt ia l cl as s cert ifi cat io n. Fo r in st an ce, th e di st ric t co ur t reject ed th e no ti on th at

New Je rs ey la w wou ld ap pl y fo r al l pl ai nt iff s' pu bl ic it y rig ht s cl ai m s an d be li ev ed it

wou ld ne ed to ap pl y M i n n es ot a co nf li ct of la ws to de te rm in e if th ere is a co nf li ct

am on g th e st at es ' la ws, whi ch m ay in cl ud e th e la ws of th e st at es in w h i c h t he
pl ai nt iff s res id e, in whi ch th e pl ai nt iff s pl ay ed fo ot ba ll

, un de r whi ch th e co nt ract s are

go ve rn ed

, an d th e ho m e st a t e s o f t h e N F L an d NFL Fi lm s. So m e of th es e st at es

pr ov id e fo r pu bl ic it y rig ht s by st at ut e, so m e by co m m on la w, whi le so m e do no t

reco gn iz e an y

su ch rig ht s. In th e st at es th at reco gn iz e su ch a cau se of a ct io n, s om e

st at es tre at it as a to rt, w h i l e o th ers tre at it as a pr op ert y rig ht

. Bec au se th e di st ric t

co ur t wou ld be req u ire d to ap pl y in di vi du al iz ed ch oi ce-o f-l aw an al y si s fo r each
pl ai nt iff 's cl ai m in th e cl as s act io n, se e Ph i l l ip s Pet ro le um Co

. v. Sh ut ts

, 47 2 U.S.

79 7, 82 2- 23 (1 98 5)

, th e di st ric t co ur t fo un d t h a t w i t h a cl as s of ne arl y 25 ,00 0

in di vi du al s, "t he ch oi ce-o f-l aw in qu iry [wo ul d be ] ex tre mel y co m pl ex an d weig hs

he av il y ag ai ns t ul ti m at e cert ifi cat io n of th e cl as s." Dry er, 20 13 W L 58 88 23 1, at *5

. In ad di ti on , th e qu es ti on of da m ag es fo r each pl ay er is hi gh ly in di vi du al

. How of te n

th ey ap pe ared

, in wha t cap ac i t y, an d, m os t im po rta nt ly, wha t th e va lu e is of th ei r

ap pe aran ce wi ll be ve ry

de pe nd an t o n e ach in di vi du al cla ss m em be r.

Thi rd

, th e NFL ad va nc ed pl au si bl e affi rm at iv e de fen se s th at m ay ha ve en ti rel y

pr ecl ud ed an y reco ve ry

. Fo r ex am pl e, th e NFL rei te rat es on ap pe al

, wit h su pp or ti ng

ev id en ce, th at fo rm er NFL pl ay ers un de rs to od an d co ns en te d to th e NFL's us e of th ei r

li ke ne ss es for m an y

y ears an d e ve n p ro vi de d v ol un ta ry in te rv ie ws t o b e u se d i n t he

NFL Fi lm s' vi de os

. The NFL al so arg ue d th e NFL Fi lm s' vi de os are "en te rta in m en t

pr og ram m in g, no t co m

m erci al sp eech ," an d are th us su bjec t to Fi rs t Am en dm en t

pr ot ect io n. In a li ti ga ti on in Cal ifo rn ia st at e co ur t in vo lv in g si m il ar is su es , th e co ur t

de ni e d c l as s cert ifi cat io n an d ev en tu al ly fo un d th at th e us e of ba se ba ll pl ay ers '

pu b li ci ty rig ht s was pr ot ect ed by th e Fi rs t Am en dm en t. See Gio nf rid do v. Majo r Leag ue Bas eb al l, 1 1 4 C a l

. Rp tr. 2d 30 7, 31 8 (Cal

. Ct

. App

. 20 01 ) ("B al an ci ng pl ai nt iff s' ne gl ig ib le ec ono m ic in te res ts ag ai ns t th e pu bl ic 's en du rin g fas ci na ti on wit h

-1 9-ba se ba ll 's pa st , we co nc lu de th at th e pu bl ic in te res t fa vo rin g t he free di ss em in at io n

of in fo rm at io n reg ard in g ba se ba ll 's hi st or y far ou twei gh s an y pr op rie ta ry in te res ts at

st ak e."). In fin di ng th at th e Fi rs t Am en dm en t ba rre d b a s e ba ll pl ay ers ' rig ht of

pu bl ic it y cl ai m s fo r t h e u se of th ei r na m es , li ke ne ss es , an d st at is ti cs in fan ta sy

ba se ba ll ga m es , th is Co ur t fo un d th e reas on in g in Gio nf rid do pe rs ua si ve

. See C.B.C.

Dis tri b. an d M kt g., In c. v. Major Leagu e Bas eb al l Adv an ced Med ia

, L.P., 50 5 F .3d

81 8, 82 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ) ("Th e Su pr em e C o u r t h a s di rect ed th at st at e la w rig ht s of

pu bl ic it y m

us t be ba la nc ed ag ai ns t fir st am en dm en t co ns id erat io ns , s ee Zacch in i v.

Scri pp s- Howar d Bro ad

., 43 3 U.S. 56 2 (1 97 7)

, an d he re we co nc lu de th at th e fo rm er

m us t gi ve way to th e la tt er.") . As di sc us se d be lo w, t he di st ric t co ur t, in di sm is si ng

th e cl ai m s of th e m em

be rs who op te d ou t of th e cl as s, fo un d th es e an d ot he r de fen se s

m eri to rio us

.

Fi na ll y , e ve n if th e pl ai nt iff s ob ta in ed cl as s cert ifi cat io n an d ov erca m e al l of

th e NFL's affi rm at iv e de fen se s, fo r m os t, t he da m ag e po te nt ia l was no t pa rti cu la rly

la rg e. The di st ric t co ur t reco gn iz ed th at fo r a few m em be rs of th e cl as s, th e po te nt ia l

co ul d b e "s ub st an ti al ." Fo r m an y , h owe ve r, th e p ay ou t wo ul d b e m in im al . Ind eed

, th e co ur t n ot ed th e la ck of "l ik el ih oo d of an y in di vi du al in cu rri ng en ou gh da m ag es

on th ei r cl ai m s to m ak e pu rs ui t of in di vi du al act io ns wor th whi le ." Dry er, 20 13 W L

5 8 8 8 2 31

, at *7 n.2

. Mo reo ve r, an y da m ag e cal cu la ti on fo r th e va lu e of pu bl ic it y rig ht s fo r m in or ap pe aran ces du rin g an NFL Fi lm s' vi de o wou ld be ve ry sp ecu la ti ve :

Pl ai nt iff s pl ay ed a te am sp or t, whe re at an y gi ve n ti m e th ere are 22 m en

on th e fie ld of pl ay

. Any im ag e fro m a ga m e wou ld al m os t by ne ces si ty
in cl ud e m or e th an on e in di vi du al an d of te n in cl ud es m an y in di vi du al s. The ap po rti on m en t of p u bl ic it y -ri gh ts da m ag es am on g th e in di vi du al s f eat ur ed —wh et he r pl ay ers , co ach es , si de li ne wor ke rs , of fic ia l s , ch eerl ead ers , or o th ers —i s a He rcu le an tas k.

Id . at 7

. The refo re, if App el la nt s are wro ng ab ou t th ei r li ke li ho od of s uc ces s al on g

an y st ep of th e way , al l pl ai nt iff s wil l ga i n n o t h i n g a nd lo se no t on ly t he be ne fit of

-2 0-a la rg e su m of m on ey de vo te d to th em bu t al so th e be ne fit s of fere d by th e Lice ns in g Age nc y

. App el la nt s, who bel ie ve th ey are du e a s ub st an ti al pa y ou t, s ti ll arg ue th ey

wou ld ha ve be en be tt er of f wit ho ut se tt le m en t be cau se th ey were li ke ly to pr ev ai l at

tri al an d ob ta in su b s t a n ti al da m ag es

. W e ha ve rep eat ed ly reject ed arg um en ts "t ha t

co m pr om is e was un ne ces sa ry be cau se [th e pa rt y] w o u l d ha ve pr ev ai le d at tri al ."

Pro f'l Fi refi gh te rs Ass 'n of Om ah a, Loc al 38 5 v. Zale wsk i, 6 7 8 F

. 3d 64 0, 64 9 (8 th

Ci r. 20 12 ). App el la nt s Ma rcu s D. Gas ti ne au an d Abd ul Sal aam arg ue th ey "h av e

co m pr om is ed cl ai m s ag ai ns t th e NFL th at have subs ta ntial ly gr eat er va lu e th an ret ire d
pl ay ers who se ga m e fo ot ag e ha s ne ve r be en us ed by th e NFL." Bu t if Gas ti ne au an d

Sal aam were so co nf

id en t in th e li ke li ho od of a su bs ta nt ia l pa y ou t fo r th ei r cl ai m s,

th ey co ul d ha ve op te d ou t of th e se tt le m en t to pu rs ue th ei r own cl ai m s, as so m e cl as s

m em be rs di d.

In fact

, th e th ree ap pe ll an ts who op te d ou t of the se tt le m en t an d pr oc eed ed to

th e m eri ts of th ei r cl ai m s ha d th ei r cl ai m s en ti rel y di sm is se d by th e di st ric t co ur t. In 6

th e or de r gr an ti ng su m

m ary jud gm en t in fav or of th e NFL, t he co ur t f o u n d t h a t th e

NFL Fi lm s' vi de os were no t co m m erci al sp eech an d th at aft er "[a ]n ev al ua ti on [, ] th e

fu ll reco rd sh ow[ ed ] th at th e ba la n c e be twee n Pl ai nt iff s' pu bl ic it y rig ht s an d th e

co ns ti tu ti on al pr ot ect io n du e th e us es in vo lv ed he re ti p[ pe d] de ci de dl y in fav or of th e

NFL." Dry er v. Nat'l Fo ot ba ll Leag ue , No. 09 -2 18 2 (PAM/ FLN), 20 14 W L 51 06 73 8,

at *1 0 (D. M i n n

. Oct. 10

, 20 14 ). Mo reo ve r, th e co ur t co nc lu de d th at ev en if th e

vi de os were co m

m erci al sp eech

, th e pl ai nt iff s st il l fai le d to d e mo ns tra te "g en ui ne

is su es of fact in th e reco rd to es ta bl is h th ei r pu bl ic it y -ri gh ts cl ai m s." Id

. at *1 1.

Not ab ly, th e co ur t als o reject ed th e p la in ti ffs ' arg um en t t ha t New J ers ey la w sh ou ld

Oth er fo rm er NFL pl ay ers who op te d ou t of th e se tt le m en t in it ia te d act io ns in 6

di ffer en t di st ric ts

, whi ch were th en tra ns ferr ed to th e Dis tri ct of Mi nn es ot a. See Cu lp

v. NFL Pro ds

., LLC, No. 13 -7 81 5 (NLH/J S), 20 14 W L 48 28 18 9, at *1 (D.N.J. Sep t.
29

, 20 14 ); Tho mp s on v. Nat'l Fo ot ba ll Leag ue , No. 1: 13 -CV-0 03 67

, 20 14 W L

16 46 92 9, at *1 (W. D. Pa. Apr

. 24

, 20 14 ); Tatu m v. Nat'l Fo ot ba ll Leag ue , No. 2- 13

- CV-0 18 14 , 20 14 W L 16 52 79 4, at *1 (W .D. Pa. Apr. 2 4, 2 01 4)

.

-2 1-ap pl y to th ei r cl ai m s, in st ead c on si de rin g Cal ifo rn ia

, Tex as , Mi nn es ot a, an d New

Yor k law. Id . at * 11 -1 2. Aft er ap pl y in g th e rel ev an t sta te la w, th e co ur t fou nd th at

ev ery st at e's la w reg ard in g th e ne wswo rth in es s de fen se ba rred ev ery pl ai nt iff 's

pu bl ic it y cl ai m s. I d

. a t * 1 2

- 1 5. The co ur t al so co nc lu de d th at ev ery st at e's la w

reg ard in g co ns en t ba rred th e pl ai nt iff s' pu bl ic it y cl ai m s. Id

. at *1 5- 16

. Si m il arl y , th e

co ur t h el d t ha t t he "NFL's va li d cop y rig ht in th e ga m e fo ot ag e fo recl os es Pla in ti ffs '

pu bl ic it y cl ai m s." Id

. at *1 7. Fi na ll y , th e co ur t co nc lu de d th at th e pl ai nt iff s' Lan ha m 7

Act cl ai m s fai le d be cau se th e NFL Fi lm s' vi de os were no t c o mm e r c i al sp eech

, an d

ev en if th ey were, th e us e of pl ai nt iff s' li ke ne ss es were in no way fal se or m is le ad in g.

Id . a t *1 8. In su m

m ary, th e d is tri ct co ur t re jecte d e ve ry

si ng le on e o f th e pl ai nt iff s'

cl ai m s un de r ev ery st at e la w a nd un de r ev ery si ng le th eo ry an d de fen se

. W hi le th e

m eri ts of th e or de r gr an ti ng su m m ary jud gm en t are no t be fo re us in th is ap pe al

, th e 8

di st ric t co ur t's o r d e r is ne ve rth el es s st ro ng ev id en ce th at it m ean t wha t it sa id in it s

or de r ap pr ov in g t he set tl em en t re ga rd in g t he li ke li ho od of s uc ces s o n t he m eri ts

.

Th e di st ric t co ur t care fu ll y an d th ou gh tfu ll y co ns id ered th e st ren gt h of th e pl ai nt iff s' cas e an d al l of th e po te nt ia l ris ks th ey wou ld face by co nt in ui ng to li ti ga te

. Si nc e th e di st ric t co ur t wou ld ha ve be en th e on e to de ci de th e is su es , th ou gh it di d no t

ha ve th e b en efi t o f fu ll br ie fin g on al l i ss ue s at th e ti m e an d c ou ld ha ve ch an ge d i ts

mind

, it was in th e be st po si ti on to fo reca st th e li ke ly ou tc om e on th e is su e s t h a t

wou ld co m e b efo re i t. It s d eci si on is en ti tl ed to de fere nc e.

W e no te th at we rece nt ly affi rm ed th e di sm is sa l of a pl ai nt iff 's pu bl ic it y rig ht s 7

cl ai m s on th e ba si s th at th ey we r e p reem pt ed by th e Co pyrig ht Act. See Ray v. ESPN, In c., No. 14 -2 11 7, 20 15 W L 18 10 48 6, at *3 (8 th Ci r. Apr

. 22

, 20 15 ) (h ol di ng th at "Ra y 's li ke ne ss es co ul d no t be de ta ch ed fro m th e co pyrig ht ed pe rfo rm an ces th at

were co nt ai ne d i n t he fil m s" ).

The m eri ts of th e or de r are pre se nt ly be fo re us in a se pa rat e ap pe al

. See No. 8

14 -3 42 8. Not hi ng in ou r an al y si s he re sh ou ld be t a k e n as an in di cat io n of ho w t he

m eri ts of t he is su es wil l u lt im at el y be de ci de d.

-2 2-2 - Va lu e o f th e Set tl em en t Term s t o t he Cla ss

App el la nt s fir st arg ue th at th e di st ric t co ur t co ul d no t ap pr ov e th e se tt le m en t

wit ho ut a sp eci fic va lu e fo r th e ex pe ct ed am ou nt of r eco ve ry on th e cl as s m em

be rs '

cl ai m s. Seco nd

, th ey arg ue th e se tt le m en t of fers in su ffi ci en t va lu e to th e cl as s. W e

ad dr es s ea ch arg um en t i n t ur n.

W it h res pe ct to th e fir st arg um en t, th e Nin th Ci rcu it reject ed th is ex act

arg um en t in Lan e: "we rej e c t O bjec to rs ' arg um en t in so far as it st an ds fo r th e

pr op os it io n th at th e di st ric t co ur t was req ui red to fin d a sp e c i f i c mo ne ta ry va lu e

co rres po nd in g to each of th e pl ai nt iff cl as s's st at ut or y cl ai m s an d co m pa re th e va lu e

of th os e cl ai m s to th e pr of fere d se tt le m en t award ." Lan e, 69 6 F.3 d at 82 3. The co ur t

reas on ed th at whi le th e di st ric t co ur t carr ie s an ob li ga ti on to ev al ua te th e st ren gt h of

th e pl ai nt iff

s' cas e rel at iv e to th e ris ks of co nt in ue d li ti ga ti on , "i t ne ed no t in cl ud e in

it s ap pr ov al or de r a sp eci fic fin di ng of fact as to th e po te nt ia l reco ve ry fo r each of th e pl ai nt iff s' c a u s es of act io n." Id

. Su ch a req ui rem en t wou ld "o fte n be im po ss ib le ."

Id

. Thu s, th e di st ric t co ur t's ob li ga ti on w a s t o e v a l u a te "t he pl ai nt iff s' ca se in it s

en ti ret y rat he r th an on a cl ai m -b y -cl ai m ba si s." Id.

App el la nt s arg ue , an d so m e co ur ts ha ve cal le d fo r, a m or e de ta il ed ev al ua ti on

of th e va lu e of cl as s cl ai m s. Fo r ex am pl e, on e of th e fact or s ad op te d in ot he r ci rcu it s

in ev al ua ti ng th e fai rn es s, reas on ab le ne ss , an d ad eq ua cy of a cl as s se tt le m en t is "t he

ran ge of reas on ab le ne ss of th e se tt le m en t fu nd in li gh t of th e be st po ss ib le reco ve ry ."

Girs h v. Je ps on , 52 1 F.2 d 15 3, 15 7 (3 d Ci r. 19 75 ) (q uo ti ng Ci ty of Detr oi t v. Grin ne ll

Co rp ., 4 95 F.2 d 44 8, 46 3 (2 d. Ci r. 19 74 )). Bu t th is is no t a req ui red fin di ng in th is

Ci rcu it

. Si m il arl y , th e S e v e nt h Ci rcu it ha s cri ti ci zed di st ric t co ur ts ' fai lu re to

ad eq ua te ly va lu at e th e po te nt ia l of th e pl ai nt iff s' cl ai m s: "t he jud ge sh ou ld ha ve m ad e

a g r e a t e r e f

f or t (h e m ad e no ne ) to qu an ti fy th e ne t ex pe ct ed va lu e of co nt in ue d

li ti ga ti on to th e cl as s

. . . . Dete rm in in g th at va lu e wou ld req ui re es ti m at in g th e ran ge

of po ss ib le ou tc om es an d as cri bi n g a p r o b ab il it y to each po in t on th e ran ge ."

-2 3-Reynol ds v. Ben efi ci al Nat'l Ban k, 28 8 F.3 d 27 7, 28 4- 85 (7 th Ci r. 20 02 ). Howev er,

th e Sev en th Cir cu it als o a ck no wled ge d th at "[a] hi gh de gr ee o f pr eci si on can no t b e

ex pe ct ed in va lu in g a li ti ga ti on , es pe ci al ly reg ard in g th e es ti m at io n of th e pr ob ab il it y

of pa rti cu la r ou tc om es ." Id

. at 28 5. The co ur t su gg es te d, a s a n ex am pl e, th at "t he
jud ge co ul d ha ve in si st ed t h a t t he pa rti es pr es en t ev id en ce th at wou ld en ab le fo ur

po ss ib l e o u t c o mes to be es ti m at ed : cal l th em hi gh , m ed iu m , l ow, an d zero ." Id . a t

28 5. The jud ge co ul d ha ve th en es ti m at ed an " a p p r o xi m at e ran ge of pe rcen ta ge s,

refl ect in g th e pr ob ab il it y of ob ta in in g each of th es e ou tc om es in a tri al (m or e li ke ly

a se rie s of tria ls )" for each ou tc om e to de riv e a "b al lp ark va lu at io n." Id

. The Nin th

Ci rcu it ha s ex pr es sl y cri ti ci zed su ch a de ta il ed a p p r o a c h as a req ui rem en t. See

Ro dr ig ue z v. W es t Pu bl 'g Co rp ., 5 63 F.3 d 94 8, 96 5 (9 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (ci ti ng Sev en th

Ci rcu it la w an d reject in g th e no ti on th at "t he co ur t sh ou ld ha ve sp eci fic al ly weig he d

th e m eri ts of th e cl as s's cas e ag ai ns t th e s e t t l e men t am ou nt an d qu an ti fie d th e

ex pe ct ed va lu e of fu ll y li ti ga ti ng th e m at te r")

. The Thi rd Ci rcu it ha s al so

ack no wle d g e d t h a t req ui rin g a de ta il ed an d in vo lv ed cal cu lu s fo r th e ex pe ct ed

reco ve ry is no t al way s p os si bl e:

W e no te th at in s o me c a s e s, 'th e tra di ti on al cal cu lu s su gg es te d by th e Man ua l fo r Co m

pl ex Lit ig at io n

. . . an d a d o pt ed by [u s] can no t be

ap pl ie d' [b ecau se ]

. . . cal cu la ti ng th e va lu e of th e be st po ss ib le reco ve ry

wou ld ha ve be en 'ex ceed in gl y sp ecu la ti ve ' an d bo th th e st ru ct ur e of th e

se tt le m en t an d th e un cap pe d be ne fit [can m ak e] it 'di ffi cu lt to de te rm in e

accu rat el y

th e act ua l v al ue of t he set tl em en t.'

In re Pet Fo od Pro ds

. Liab

. Lit ig

., 62 9 F.3 d 33 3, 35 5 n.3 0 (3 d. Ci r. 20 10 ) (al te rat io ns

in ori gi na l).

Alt ho ug h th is Co ur t ha s no t sp eci fic al ly de fin ed ho w m uc h pr eci si on a di st ric t

co ur t m us t us e in ev al ua ti ng t h e st ren gt h of th e pl ai nt iff s' cas e, we ha ve pr ev io us ly

ex pl ai ne d th at "i n ap pr ov in g a se tt le m en t[,] th e di st ric t co ur t ne ed no t un de rta ke th e
type o f d et ai le d in ve st ig at io n th at tryin g th e cas e wou ld in vo lv e." Van Hor n, 84 0

-2 4-F.2 d at 60 7. W e se e no ne ed to ad op t th e Sev en th Ci rcu it 's ap pr oa ch in th is cas e. In

a cas e su ch as th is on e, whe re th e da m ag e s a r e no t eas il y cal cu la bl e, are hi gh ly

sp ecu la ti ve , an d are he av il y de pe nd en t on ex pe rt op in io ns , it wou ld be di ffi cu lt if no t

im po ss ib le to de riv e th e in it ia l hi gh

, m ed iu m , lo w, an d zero fo r po te nt ia l va lu e of th e

cl ai m s in su ch an accu rat e way as to al lo w fo r a m ean in gf ul co nc lu si on

. In so do in g,

we do no t m ean to di sc ou rag e di st ric t co ur ts fro m req ui rin g pa rti es to pr ov id e

va lu at io ns fo r th e cl as s cl ai m s; rat he r, we le av e th e req ui red lev el of det ai l for su ch

a sh owi ng in each cas e to th e so un d di sc re t i o n o f t h e di st ric t co ur t. To req ui re th e

di st ric t co ur t t o m ak e d et ai le d fa ct ua l fi nd in gs on th e v al ue of c la ss cla im s i n e ve ry

cas e, ev en if i t wo ul d u lt im at el y fin d a ny of it s fi nd in gs of l it tl e v al ue to ev al ua ti ng

th e fai rn es s, reas on ab le ne ss , an d ad eq ua cy of th e se tt le m en t wou ld ru n co un te r to th is

Co ur t's gu id in g pr in ci pl e th at "[t ]he ve ry pu rp os e of co m pr om is e is to av oi d th e de la y

an d ex pe ns e of su ch a tri al ," Gru ni n, 51 3 F. 2 d at 12 4 (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s

om it t e d ) a n d t ha t "[t ]he pa rti es to a cl as s act io n are no t req ui red to in cu r im m en se

ex pe ns e be fo re se tt li ng as a m ean s to jus ti fy th at se tt le m e n t

. " D e B o e r v. Mel lo n

Mo rtg . Co., 6 4 F .3d 11 71 , 11 78 (8t h C ir. 1 99 5)

.

Here, th ere was so m e ev id en ce in th e reco rd on th e va lu e of th e cl ai m s. As pa rt

of th e se tt le men t pr oc es s, th e Mag is tra te Ju dg e req ui red th e pa rti es to pr ov id e a

"co nc is e su m

m ary of [th ei r] an al y si s of th e da m ag e s is su es " an d ot he r co nf id en ti al

fin an ci al in fo rm at io n. At or al arg um en t, le ad se tt le m en t c o u n se l pr ov id ed fu rth er

de ta il s reg ard in g th e ev id en ce pr es en te d to th e Mag is tra te Ju dg e, whi ch in cl ud ed co

le ad pl ai nt iff

s' cou ns el 's calc ul at ed es ti m at e of a ran ge of da m ag es ba se d on a ni ne

y ear pe r i o d f

r om fin an ci al reco rd s pr od uc ed by th e NFL th us far. Bec au se th e Mag is tra te Ju dg e was pa rt o f th e di st ric t co ur t, an d was ta sk ed wit h co nd uc ti ng th e

se tt le m en t di sc us si on s be twee n bo th pa rti es in an effo r t t o ach ie ve a m ut ua ll y

ag reea bl e res ol ut io n, th e di st ric t co ur t he ld th at "[w]hen in fo rm at io n is su bm it te d to
[h im ], it is su bm it te d to th is Co ur t." Dry er, 20 13 W L 58 88 23 1, at *4

. Add it io na ll y ,

as pa rt of th ei r ob

jecti on s to th e se tt le m en t, App el la nt s pr ov i d e d t h e de cl arat io n of

Carl G. Deg an , an eco no m ic da m ag es ex pe rt. Deg an ex pl ai ne d se ve ral co m pl ex

-2 5-fo rm

ul as an d al te rn at iv es th ro ug h whi ch he be li ev ed it wou ld be feas ib le to cal cu la te

da m ag es an d al so in cl ud ed a se ve n- pa ge an al y si s on wha t he be li ev ed to be th e va lu e

of th e cl ai m s rel at iv e to th e se tt le m en t. The in fo rm at io n was av ai la bl e to th e di st ric t

co ur t, an d th e di st ric t co ur t was en ti tl ed to affo rd it wha te ve r w e i g h t it fo un d

ap pr op ria te

. In te r e s t i ng ly, al th ou gh Deg an was as ke d to "ev al ua te th e pr op os ed

se tt le m en t va lu e vi s- à-v is po te nt ia l da m ag es ," he fai le d to pr ov id e an y op in io n on th e

sp eci fic va lu e of th e cl as s cl ai m s— he m erel y op in ed th e se tt le m en t w a s t o o sm al l.

The ab se nc e of a sp eci fic va lu e in hi s de cl arat io n is ha rd ly su rp ris in g si nc e to at te m pt

to reac h su ch sp eci fic va lu e of th e cl as s cl ai m s, th e pa rti es wou ld ha ve n e e d e d fu ll

an d co m pl et e di sc ov ery of th e NFL's fin an ces , a co m pr eh en si ve rev ie w of th e

su bs ta nt ia l am ou nt of ev id en ce wit h reg ard to each of th e ne arl y 25 ,00 0 m em be rs , an d

ex pe ns iv e ex pe rt rep or ts to su pp or t t h e c o n c lu si on s reac he d. Req ui rin g th e pa rti es

to un de rg o su ch an el ab or at e an d ex pe ns iv e p r oc es s to pr od uc e wha t li ke ly wou ld

ha ve be en two op po si ng sp ecu la ti ve es ti m at es far ap art se em s to be of li tt le va lu e in

th is cas e—e sp eci al ly co ns id eri ng th at th e pr oc es s m ay ha ve un rav el ed th e po te nt ia l

fo r se tt le m en t. Tak i n g i n t o acco un t th at an y de riv ed ex pe ct ed va lu e of th e cl ai m s

m us t be weig he d ag ai ns t th e li ke li ho od of su cces s on th e m eri ts

, whi ch is ev en m or e

di ffi cu lt to qu an ti ta ti ve ly m eas ur e in th is cas e, reaf fir m s th at a m or e sp ecifi c va luat io n

of th e cl ai m s in th is pa rti cu la r cas e was no t req ui red

. The refo re, th e di st ric t co ur t di d

no t err by no t req ui rin g ad di ti on al ex pe rt ev id en ce on th e is su e. W e ha ve m or e th an

en ou gh of a "b as is fo r de te rm in i ng th at [th e di st ric t co ur t's ] de ci si on res ts on 'well

reas on ed co nc lu si on s' an d is no t 'm ere bo il erp la te .'" In re W ire le ss , 39 6 F.3 d at 93 3.

W e al so reject th e arg um en t th at th e se tt le m en t of fers in su ffi ci en t va lu e to th e

cl as s. As alr ead y

no te d, t he se tt le m en t ag reem en t p ro vi de s fo r two cle ar an d d ire ct

be ne fit s to th e cl as s: th e Lice ns in g Age nc y an d th e pa y m en t of up to $4 2 m il li on fo r

th e b en efi t o f th e cl as s.

The Lice ns in g Age nc y crea te d by th e se tt le m en t ag reem en t is an ag en cy whi ch

al lo ws fo r on e-s to p sh op pi ng fo r th os e se ek in g to ob ta in th e pu bl ic it y rig ht s of fo rm er

-2 6-NFL pl ay ers

. I t s pu rp os e is to as si st fo rm er pl ay ers in id en ti fy in g an d se cu rin g

bu si ne ss op po rtu ni ti es fo r li cen si ng

. The se tt li ng p la in ti ffs be li ev e th e Lice ns in g Age nc y "wi ll si gn ifi can tl y red uc e tra ns act io n co st s an d un lo ck th e va lu e of th e gr ou p

pu bl ic it y rig ht s of Cl as s Mem be rs ." App el la nt s arg ue th e Lice ns in g Age nc y do es no t

pr ov id e m

uc h be ne fit be cau se fo rm er pl ay ers can li cen se th ei r li ke ne ss es th ro ug h th e

NFL Alu m

ni Ass oc ia ti on 's gr ou p- li cen si ng pr og ram

. Bu t reg ard le ss of whe th er so me

be ne fit s m ig ht be du pl ic at iv e, th e Lice n s i n g A ge nc y of fers un iq ue be ne fit s su ch as

th e pr om is ed co op erat io n fro m th e NFL in li cen si ng it s lo go s an d tra de m ark s. Thu s,

th e Lice ns in g Age nc y is a s i g n ifi can t an d di rect be ne fit to al l cl as s m em be rs

. Mo reo ve r, th e pr eci se va lu e of th e be ne fit fro m t h e Li cen si ng Age nc y was fo r th e

di st ric t co ur t to co ns id er in th e fir st in st an ce, an d th e di st ric t co ur t fo un d it va lu ab le :

"fo rm er pl ay ers wil l al so fin al ly ha ve an av en ue to pu rs ue co m m erci al in te r e s ts in

th ei r own im ag es an d in th ei r im ag es as pa rt of th ei r fo rm er team s, for the fir st ti m e

in co nju nc ti o n w i t h th e NFL's co pyrig ht s an d tra de m ark s

. . . ." Dry er, 20 13 W L

58 88 23 1, at *1

. As th e di st ric t co ur t su m m ari zed

, "s ho ul d th e Lice ns in g Age nc y be

un ab le to m ark et in di vi du al an d gr o u p pu bl ic it y rig ht s be cau se of la ck of m ark et

de m an d, th en it is cl ear th at th e cl as s di d no t tru ly su ffer th e da m ag es al le ge d in th is

cas e." Id . at * 7.

In ad di ti on to th e be ne fit s of th e Lice ns in g Age nc y , th e cl a s s m em be rs ha ve
$4 2 m il li on fo r th ei r be ne fit

. Alt ho ug h th e m on ey is no t pa id di rect ly to an y sp eci fic
pl ay er an d do es no t gu aran te e an y sp eci fic am ou nt to an y sp eci fic pl ay er, th e cl earl y

st at ed pu rp os e of th e fu nd s is to be ne fit th e cl as s. As th e di st ric t co ur t ex pl ai ne d, th e

pa y ou t is "a bo on to th os e th ou sa nd s up on th ou sa nd s of fo rm er NFL pl ay ers who can

no w reap th e co ll ect iv e be ne fit of a la rg e fin an ci al pa y ou t to a fu nd or ga ni zed so le ly

fo r th ei r be ne fit , ov ers een by the ir c om rad es -in -arm s." Id. at *1

.

W hi le App el la nt s m ay no t be li ev e th ey rece iv ed ad eq ua te va lu e fo r wha t th ey

be li ev e th ei r own in di v i d u a l c l a i m s were wor th

, in ev al ua ti ng th e st ren gt h of th e pl ai n t i f f s ' cas e an d th e po te nt ia l va lu e, th e di st ric t co ur t m us t ta ke in to acco un t th e

-2 7-in te res ts of th e en ti re cl as s— no t m erel y th e na m ed pl ai nt iff s. Thu s, it m

us t ba la nc e

th e c l a i ms of th os e wit h po te nt ia ll y su bs ta nt ia l da m ag es to th os e wit h po te nt ia ll y

m in im al or in si gn ifi can t da m ag es

. "It is an in he ren t feat ur e of th e cl as s- act io n de vi ce

th at in di vi du al cl as s m em be rs wil l of

te n cl ai m di ffer in g am ou nt s of da m ag es ." Lan e,

69 6 F.3 d at 82 4. Thi s is su e is ap pa ren t he re, an d th e di st ric t co ur t as tu te ly to ok no ti ce

of it by ex pl ai ni ng th at on e of th e na m ed pl ai nt iff s, who "was feat ur ed in at le as t on e

NFL Fi lm s' pr od u c t i o n," st oo d to ga in "re la ti ve ly su bs ta nt ia l" da m ag es , as su m in g

th ey were no t ba rred by th e st at ut e of li m it at io ns or th e NFL's ot he r affi rm a t iv e

de fen se s. Dry er, 20 13 W L 58 88 23 1, at *7

. Co nv ers el y , "[a ] m em be r of th e de fen si ve

sq ua d fo r th e 19 86 Su pe r Bo wl ru nn er-u p New Eng la n d P a t r io ts

, . . . m ig ht ap pe ar

br ie fly in a do cu m en ta ry ab ou t th e Su pe r-Bo wl-wi nn in g Ch ic ag o Bea rs , bu t th at

im ag e wou ld be fle et in g an d en ti tl ed to li tt le

, i f a n y, c om pe ns at io n." Id

. Thu s, in

reac hi ng th e se tt le m en t, so m e m em be rs wou ld po te nt i a l l y be fo reg oi ng a la rg er

pa y m en t t h a n ot he rs , were th ey to pr ev ai l on th e cl ai m s. W ere su ch m em be rs

req ui r e d t o en ti rel y fo rg o th ei r cl ai m s, th e se tt le m en t m ay be un fai r. Bu t th ere is a

well -es ta blishe d rem ed y th at an y cl as s m em be r m ay el ect to pr es erv e wha t he be li ev es

to be a cl ai m wor t h m or e th an wha t he m ay rece iv e un de r th e se tt le m en t— op t ou t.

As th e La n e co ur t ex pl ai ne d, th is is "wh y du e pr oc es s req ui res th at in di vi du al

m em be rs of a cl as s ce rti fie d u nd er Rul e 23 (b )(3 ) be gi ve n an op po rtu ni ty to op t ou t

o f th e se tt le m en t cl as s to pu rs ue th ei r cl ai m s se pa rat el y ." 69 6 F.3 d at 82 4. Th i s

im po rta nt pr oc ed ur al rig ht ack no wled ge s th e pr act ic al real it y th at "a cl as s act io n

se tt le men t ne ces sa ril y refl ect s th e pa rti es ' pr e-t ria l as se ss m en t as to th e po te nt ia l

reco ve ry of t he en ti re cl as s, wi th all of i ts cla ss m em be rs ' va ry in g c la im s." Id.

Add it io na ll y , th e NFL sp eci fic al ly res erv ed $1 3.5 m il li on fro m th e $4 2 m il li on

pa y m en t fo r an y ex pe ns es rel at ed to op t-o ut li ti ga ti on , ex pe ct in g so m e in di vi du al s to

op t ou t. The pl ai nt iff

s who op te d ou t of th e se tt le m en t co ul d ha ve br ou gh t th ei r own

in di vi du al or co ll ect iv e act io n ag a i ns t th e NFL an d po te nt ia ll y ob ta in ed th e di rect

fin an ci al pa y ou t th ey al le ge i s l a c k in g in th is se tt le m en t. In fact

, th ree of th e

in di vi du al s wh o o pt ed ou t h ad th ei r cl ai m s d is m is se d wi th no reco ve ry at a ll

.

-2 8-App el la nt s als o arg ue th e in it ia l den ia l of prel im in ary ap pr ov al fo r th e NFL's

co nc us si on li ti ga ti on se tt le m en t de m on st rat es th e un reas on ab le ne ss of th e se tt le m en t

in th is cas e. See In re Nat'l Fo ot ba l l Leag ue Pl ay ers ' Co nc us si on In jury Lit ig ., 9 61

F. Su pp

. 2d 70 8 (E.D. Pa. 20 14 ). The co nc us si on li ti ga ti on in vo lv es di ffer en t cl ai m s,

su bjec t to di ffer en t ris ks

, de fen se s, an d li ke li ho od of su cces s, di ffer en t cl as s

m em be rs , an d di ffer en t po te nt ia l da m ag es

. The m ere fact th at th e li ti ga ti on in vo lv es

si m il ar pa rti es in no way se rv es as a us efu l co m pa ris on in ev al ua ti ng th e

reas on ab le ne ss of t he set tl em en t fo r th e cl ai m s at is su e in th is cas e.

In th e di st ric t co ur t's ev al ua ti on , t hi s act io n in vo lv ed du bi ou s cl ai m s wit h

hi gh ly sp ecu la ti ve d a mag e s th at were un li ke ly to be ad dr es se d in th e co nt ex t of

cl as s- act io n li ti ga ti on

. Fo r th e m ajor it y of th e cl as s, th e cu rren t se tt le m en t pr ov id es

a su bs ta nt ia l be ne fit th ro ug h th e Lice ns in g Age nc y an d a pa y ou t of up to $4 2 m il li on

th ro ug h th e Co m

m on Goo d Ent it y

. The di st ric t co ur t be li ev ed th e ne go ti at ed

se tt le m en t is "a rem ark ab le vi ct or y fo r t h e c l a s s as a who le ." Dry er, 20 13 W L

58 88 23 1, at *2

. Und er ou r de fere nt ia l rev ie w, we can no t sa y th e di st ric t co ur t m ad e

a cl ear erro r of jud gm en t in weig hi ng th e rel ev an t fact or s. A c c o r d i n g l y , we do no t

be li ev e th e di st ric t co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n in ap pr ov in g th e se tt le m en t. See In re

W ire le ss , 39 6 F.3 d at 93 3 ("Weig hi ng th e un cert ai nt y of rel ie f ag ai ns t th e im m ed ia te

be ne fit pr ov id ed in th e se tt le m en t, we co nc lu de th at th e di st ric t co ur t act ed wit hi n it s

di sc ret io n whe n co n s i d eri ng th e st ren gt h of th e cl ai m s an d th e am ou nt of th e

se tt le m en t." ).

III

W e fin d th at th e di st ric t co ur t pr op erl y co ns id ered th e rel ev an t fact or s an d di d

no t ab us e it s di sc ret io n in fin di ng th at th e ne go ti at ed se tt le m en t ag reem en t in th is cas e

was fai r, reas on ab le , and ad eq ua te to th e cl as s. Th eref or e, we affi rm

.

-2 9-SMI TH, Circ ui t J ud ge , con cu rri ng

.

I co nc ur in th e co ur t's op in io n. I writ e se pa rat el y to em ph as iz e th at th is cla ss

act io n se tt le m en t is no t a cy p r e s d i s tri bu ti on li ke th e di st rib ut io n in In re

Ban kAmer ic a C

or p. S ecu ri ti es Lit ig at io n

.

"Th e te rm 'cy pr es ' is de riv ed f r o m t h e Nor m an Fren ch ex pr es si on cy pr es

co mme po ss ib le , wh ic h m ean s 'as ne ar as po ss ib le .'" In re Ba by Pro ds

. , 70 8 F .3d at

16 8 (fo ot no te om it te d) (q uo ti ng Democ ratic Cen t. Co mm. v. W as hi ng to n Met ro

. Area

Tr an si t Co mm'n

, 84 F.3 d 45 1, 45 5 n.1 (D.C. Ci r. 19 96 )). The Thi rd Ci rcu it ha s

de sc rib ed th e tr ad it io na l cy p re s di st rib ut io n i n t he cla ss -act io n c on te xt as f ol lo ws:

W he n c la ss act io ns are reso lv ed th ro ug h set tl em en t, it m ay be di ffi cu lt

to di st rib ut e th e en ti re set tl em en t fun d, afte r pa y in g att or ne y s' fees an d

co st s al on g wit h fu nd ad m in is tr a t i o n ex pe ns es , d ire ct ly t o it s in te nd ed
be ne fi ci ar ie s—t

he clas s m em

be rs

. Mo ne y m ay rem ai n un cl ai m ed if cl as s memb ers can no t be lo cat ed

, de cl in e to fil e cl ai m s, ha ve di ed

, o r t h e

pa rti es ha ve ov eres ti m at ed th e am ou nt pr ojec te d fo r di st rib ut io n fo r

so m e ot he r reas on

. It m ay al so be eco no m ic al ly or ad m in is tra ti ve ly

in feas ib le to di st rib ut e fu nd s to cl as s m em be rs if, fo r ex am

pl e, th e co st
of di st rib ut in g in di vi du al ly to al l cl as s m em be rs ex ceed s th e am ou nt to
be di st rib ut ed

. In th es e ci rcu m st an ces , co ur ts ha ve pe rm it te d th e pa rti es

to di st rib ut e to a no np art y (o r no np art ie s) th e ex ces s se tt le m en t fu nd s fo r th ei r ne xt be st us e—a ch ari ta bl e pu rp os e reas on ab ly ap pr ox im at in g th e in te res ts pu rs ue d b y

th e cl as s.

Id . at 1 68 –6 9.

"We ha ve ap pr ov ed cy pr es di st rib ut io n of un us ed or un cl ai m ed cl as s act io n

se tt le m en t fu nd s" in acco rd an ce wit h th e cri te ria se t fo rth "i n § 3.0 7 of [th e Am eri can

Law In st it ut e's (ALI)] pu b l i s h e d Pri nc ip le s of th e Law of Agg reg at e Lit ig at io n

-3 0-(2 01 0) ." In re Ban kAmer ic a Co rp

. Se c. Li ti g. , 77 5 F.3 d at 10 63 –6 4. Sect io n 3.0 7

pr ov id es :

"A co ur t m ay ap pr ov e a se tt le m en t th at pr op os es a cy pr es rem ed y

. . . . The co ur t m

us t ap pl y th e fo ll owi ng cri te ria in de te rm in in g whe th er a cy

pr es award is ap pr op ria te :

(a) If in di vi du al cl as s m em be rs can be id en ti fie d th ro ug h r e as on ab le
effo rt, an d th e di st rib ut io ns are su ffi ci en tl y la rg e to m ak e in di vi du al
d i s t rib ut io ns eco no m ic al ly vi ab le

, se tt le m en t pr oc eed s sh ou ld be
di st rib ut ed di rect ly to i nd iv id ua l cl as s m em be rs

.

(b ) If th e se tt le m en t in vo lv es in di vi du al di st rib ut io ns to cl as s m em be rs

an d fu nd s rem ai n aft er di st rib ut io ns (b ecau se so m e cl as s m em be rs co ul d

no t be id en ti fie d or ch os e no t to pa rti ci p at e), th e se tt le m en t sh ou ld

pr es um pt iv el y pr ov id e fo r fu rth er di st rib ut io ns to pa rti c i p a ti ng cl as s

m em be rs un le ss th e am ou nt s in vo lv ed are to o sm al l to m ak e in di vi du al
di st rib ut io ns eco no m ic al ly vi ab le or ot he r sp eci fic r e as on s ex is t th at

wou ld m ak e su ch fur th er d is tri bu ti on s i m po ss ib le or u nf

ai r.

( c) If th e co ur t fin ds th at in di vi du al di st rib ut io ns are no t vi a b l e b a s e d

up on th e cri te ria se t fo rth in su bs ect io ns (a) an d (b ), th e se tt le m en t m ay

ut il iz e a cy pr es ap pr oa ch

. The co ur t, whe n feas ib le

, sh ou ld req ui re th e

pa rti es to id en ti fy a reci pi en t w h o s e in te res ts reas on ab ly ap pr ox im at e th os e be in g pu rs ue d by th e cl as s

. If, an d on ly if, no reci pi en t who se in te res t reas on ab ly ap pr ox im at e th os e be in g pu rs ue d by th e cl as s can be
id en ti fie d aft er tho roug h in ve st ig at io n an d an al y si s, a co ur t m ay ap pr ov e

a reci pi en t th at do es no t reas on ab ly ap p r ox im at e th e in te res ts be in g

pu rs ue d b y

th e cl as s."

Id

. (al te rat io n in or ig in al ) (q uo ti ng ALI, Princ ipl es of th e Law of Agg reg at e Lit ig at io n § 3 .07 (20 10 )).

W e rece nt ly "cl ari fi[ ed ] th e le ga l pr in ci pl es " th at go ve rn cy pr es di st rib ut io ns

. Id . at 1 06 4.

-3 1-Fi rs t, we ag ree[ d] wit h th e Fi ft h C i r c u i t th at

, "Be cau se th e se tt le m en t

fu nd s are th e pr op ert y of th e cl as s, a cy pr es di st rib ut io n to a th ird pa rty
of un cl ai m ed se tt le m en t fu nd s is pe rm is si bl e ' on ly whe n it is no t feas ib le

to m ak e fu rth er di st rib ut io ns to c la ss m em be rs '

. . . . ex cep t whe re an ad di ti on al di st rib ut io n wou ld pr ov id e a win df al l to cl as s m em

be rs wit h
li qu id at ed -d am ag es cl ai m s th at were 10 0 pe rcen t sa ti sf ie d by th e in it ia l
di st rib ut io n."

I d

. (s eco nd al te rat io n in or ig in al ) (q uo ti ng Kl ie r , 65 8 F.3 d at 47 5 (q uo ti n g A LI

§ 3 .07 )).

" Se co nd

, a cy pr es di st rib ut io n is no t au th or iz ed by de cl ari ng

. . . th at 'al l cl as s

m em be rs su bm it ti ng cl ai m s ha ve be en sa ti sf ie d in fu ll .'" Id

. at 10 65 (ci ta ti on om it te d)

. Thi rd

, "'[a ] pr op os ed cy pr es di st rib ut io n m us t m eet [o ur st an da rd s go ve rn in g cy pr es

award s] reg ard le ss of whe th er th e award was fas hi on ed by th e se tt li ng pa rti es or th e

tri al co ur t.'" Id

. at 10 66 (al te rat io ns in or ig in al ) (q uo ti ng Na ch sh in v. AOL, LLC

, 66 3

F.3 d 10 34

, 10 40 ( 9 t h Ci r. 20 11 )). Fo ur th

, "u nl es s th e am ou nt of fu nd s to be

di st rib ut ed cy pr es is de m in im is

, th e di st ric t co ur t sh ou ld m ak e a c y pr es pr op os al

pu bl ic ly av ai la bl e an d al lo w cl as s m em be rs to ob ject or su gg es t al te rn at iv e reci pi en ts

be fo re th e co ur t se le ct s a cy pr es reci pi en t." Id

. " Fif th

, whe n a di st ric t co ur t co nc lu de s

th at a cy pr es di st rib ut io n is ap pr op ria te aft er ap pl y in g th e fo reg oi ng rig or ou s

st an da rd s, su ch a di st rib ut io n m us t be 'fo r th e ne xt b es t us e

. . . fo r in di rect cl as s

be ne fit ,' an d 'fo r us es co ns is te nt wit h th e na tu re of th e un de rlyin g act io n an d wit h th e jud ic ia l fu nc ti on .'" Id

. at 10 67 (al te rat io n in or i g i na l) (q uo ti ng In re Ka tr in a Ca na l

Brea ch es Lit ig

. , 62 8 F .3d 18 5, 1 96 (5t h C ir. 2 01 0) ).

W e ap pl ie d th e s e le ga l pr in ci pl es in In re Ban kAmer ic a Co rp

. Se cu ri ti es

Li ti ga ti on in rev ie win g a cl as s act io n se tt le m en t th a t was in di sp ut ab ly a cy pr es

di st rib ut io n. Se e id

. at 10 62

. In th at cas e, th e di st ric t co ur t o r d e r e d

, o v e r th e cl as s

rep res en ta ti ve 's ob

jecti on s, "t ha t th e ba la nc e of th e Nati on sB an k Cl as se s se tt le m en t

fu nd sh al l be dis tri bu te d cy pr es to th e Leg al Serv ic es of East ern Mi ss ou ri, Inc." Id

.

-3 2-(q uo ta ti on an d ci ta ti on om it te d)

. W e rev ers ed

, ag reei ng wit h th e cl as s rep res en ta ti ve

th at

, ap pl y in g th e le ga l pr in ci pl es se t fo rth su pr a , "t he di st ric t co u r t a b u s e d it s

d i s cret io n in or de rin g a cy pr es di st rib ut io n be cau se a fu rth er di st rib ut io n t o t h e

c l a s s e s is feas ib le

, an d in an y ev en t [th e se le ct ed ch ari ty] [was ] un rel at ed to t h e

cl as se s or th e li ti ga ti on a n d [ was ] th eref or e an in ap pr op ria te 'ne xt be st ' cy pr es

reci pi en t." Id . at 1 06 2 (f

oo tn ot e o m it te d)

.

Our th res ho ld qu es ti on is whe th er th e pr op os ed se tt le m en t i s a c y pr es

di st rib ut io n at all

. I co nc lu de th at it is no t. In cy pr es di st rib ut io ns , se tt le m en t fun ds

are di st rib ut ed to no np art ie s. Here, th e Co m m on Goo d Fu nd m

us t be us ed to pr ov id e

be ne fit s to cl as s m em

be rs , rat he r th an be in g gi ve n to no np art ie s un rel at ed to th e

li ti ga ti on

. And

, th e Co m

m on Goo d Fu nd an d Co m m on Goo d Ent it y are go ve rn ed by

a Bo ard of Dire ct or s th at in cl ud es cl as s m e m b e rs

. Fu rth erm or e, th is cas e do es no t

co nc ern " u n u s e d or un cl ai m ed cl as s act io n se tt le m en t fu nd s." Id

. at 10 64

. In fact

,

un us ed f u n d s wil l ne ver ex is t he re be cau se if th e Co m m on Goo d Ent it y do es no t

ti m el y di st rib ut e th e se tt le m en t fu nd s, th e NFL m us t do it

. Fi na ll y , t h i s c a s e is

di st in gu is ha bl e fro m In re Ban kAmer ic a Co rp

. Se cu ri ti es Li ti ga ti on be cau se , in th at

cas e, we ha d to de te rm in e ho w to ha nd le le fto ve r fu nd s in a cas h se tt le m en t; he re, th e

qu es ti on is whe th er a s e t t l e m en t m us t pr ov id e di rect cas h pa y m en ts at al l.

Acco rd in gl y , In re Ban kAmer ic a Co rp

. Se cu ri ti es Li ti ga ti o n do es no t co nt ro l th e

di sp os it io n o f th e cu rren t ap pe al

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-3 3-