FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T J UNE 17, 2009 THOMAS K. KAH

N [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 0 7- 11 90 8

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D. C. Dock etNo. 0 3- 01 50 0- CV-BE-S IN RE: HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION SECURITIES LITIGATION LEAD PLAINT IFFS , Cen tra l St at es Group a nd New Mex ic o Gro up forSto ckho ld er Lit ig at io n a nd Ret ire m en t Syste m s o f Alaba m a fo r Bo nd ho ld er Lit ig at io n, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, AIG GLOBAL INVE STMENT CORPORATION, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll an t, ve rs us HEALTH SOUTH CORPORATION, Co rp or at e d efen da ntinMas te r Lit ig at io n, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll ee.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e North ernDis tri ctof Al ab am a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Jun e 1 7, 2 00 9) Befo re MAR CUS, ANDERSON andCUDAHY,* Ci rcu itJu dg es .

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ * Honora

ble Richard D . Cudahy , United States Circuit J udg e for the Seventh Circuit, sitti ngby designation .PER CURI AM:

Thi s ap pe al ari se s fr om

a $4 45 m il li onpa rti al set tl em en t b etweenApp el le es , LeadPla in ti ffs an d Def

en da ntHeal th So ut h C or

po rat io n (t he “ Set tl in g P art ie s” ), in th e Heal th So ut h C or

po rat io n (“ Heal th So uth” ) se cu rit ie s fr au d c la ss act io n. 1 AIG Glo ba l In ve st m en t Co rp or at io n (“ AIG Glo ba l” ), anun na m edm em be r of th e 2 se tt li ng bo ndho ld er cl as s, ap pe al s t he di st ric t co urt’s d en ia l o f it s u nt im el y reque st 3 to op t o utof t he bo nd ho ld er cl as s an d t he de ni al of i ts m ot io n fo r rec on si de rat io n. AIG Glo ba l m ou nt s s ev eral arg um en ts to supp ort i ts po si ti on th atth e d is tri ct co urt erred , whi charg um en ts we di sc us s i n turn b el ow. Res po nd in g t o AIG Glo ba l’s ap pe al , th e Set tl in g P art ie s co nt en d tha t thi s C ou rt d oe s n othave juri sd ic ti on to he ar thi s ap pe al , andth atAIG Glo ba l d oe s n otha ve st an di ng to bri ng th is ap pe al . W e h ol d t ha t we d o h av e juri sd ic ti on ov er thi s ap pe al an d t ha t AIG Gl ob al do es have st an di ng to bri ng th is ap pe al . W e al so ho ldth atth e d is tri ctco urt d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n i n d en y in g AIG Gl ob al ’s un ti m el y op t-o utreque stor d en y in g i ts m ot io n fo r rec on si de rat io n. Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm .

We sua sponte seve r this appea l from Richard M. Scr ushy ’s appe al of the Par

tial 1 Final Judgment on a

n unrelated issue, appe al number 07- 10701. AI G Global is a wholly

owned subsidiary

of American I

nternational Group, Inc. 2 The c lass members a re divided into a bondholde r cla ss and a stockholde r cla ss. 3 2I. FACTS

Thi s ap pe al st em s fr om

th e Heal th So ut h s ecu rit ie s fr au d l it ig at io n. In Marc h of 20 03 , Healt hS ou th ackno wled ge d t ha t i ts pre vi ou s fi na nc ia l s ta te m en ts ha d subs ta nt ia ll y

ov ers ta te d i ts in co m e an d a ss et s. In res po ns e, Heal th So ut h i nv es to rs fil edsev eral cla ss act io ns ag ai ns t Hea lt hS ou th all eg in g v io la ti on s o f th e Sec ur it ie s Act o f 19 33 an d t he Secu rit ie s Ex ch an ge Act o f 19 34 . In J ul y of 2 00 3, the se act io ns were co ns ol id at edinth e North ernDis tri ctof Al ab am a, an d s ep arat e b on dh ol de r an d st oc kh ol de r cl as se s wer e es tabl is he d. AIG Glo ba l i s an un nam edm em be r of th e bo nd ho ld er cl as s. Afte r y ears of l it ig at io n, the Set tl in g P art ie s ag reedto a Part ia l Se tt le m en t va lu edat $ 44 5 m il li on incas h, Hea lt hS ou th st oc k, an d Hea lt hS ou th warran ts . On Sep te m be r 26 , 20 06 , th e Set tl in g P art ie s fi le d aSti pu la ti on of P art ia l Se tt le m en t with t he di st ric t co urt p ro vi di ng forcert ifi cat io n o f th e cl as s fo r se tt le m en t p ur po se s, es tabl is hi ng a se tt le m en t fu nd , andrel eas in g c la im s b y all m em be rs pa rti ci pa ti ng in th e se tt le m en t. The Sti pu la ti onin cl ud eda “bl ow p ro vi si on ,” gr an ti ng Heal th So ut h th e o pp ortuni ty to wi th dr aw fro m th e p ro po se d s ettl em en t i f a certa in un di sc lo se d nu m be r of cla ss m em

be rs op te d o utof t he Part ia l Se tt le m en t. If th e th res ho ldof 4
The thre shold number of opt outs require d to trigg er the blow provision is 4 ty pically not disclosed and is kept conf idential to encour ag e settlement a nd discourag e third parties f rom soliciting cla ss members to opt out. 3op t o ut s was m etto tri gg er the bl ow p ro vi si on , th enHeal th So ut h wo ul d h av e unt il

Ja nu ary 4, 2 00 7 t o e xe rci se it s ri gh t t o t erm in at e th e Parti al Set tl em en t. On Oct ob er 2 , 20 06 , th e d is tri ctco urt en te reda pr el im in ary or de r ap pr ov in g th e Parti al Set tl em en t. The pre li m in ary or de r certi fie d t he st oc kh ol de r an d bo nd ho ld er cl as se s fo r se tt le m en t p ur po se s, ap pr ov edth e te rm s o f th e St ip ul at io n, an d autho riz edpubl ic at io n o f th e Cl as s No ti ce. The pre li m in ary or de r es tabl is he d Decem be r 8, 2 00 6 a s t he de ad li ne forfil in g o bjec ti on s an d fo r op ti ng ou t o f th e cl as s. In ad di ti on , th e p rel im in ary or de r sc he du le d t he fai rn es s h eari ng forfin al ap pr ov al forJanua ry

8, 2 00 7. The pre li min ary or de r ap pr ov edth e fo rm an d c on te ntof t he Cla ss Not ic e. The di st ric t co urt d et erm in edth atth e requi rem en ts forcla ss no ti ce u nd er Ru le 23 were m etan d t he no ti ce co m pr is edth e “be stno ti ce p ract ic ab le un de r th e ci rcu m st an ces .” The S et tl in g P art ie s wer e requi redto m ak e rea so nabl e eff orts to id en ti fy all cla ss m em

be rs an d h av e n ot ic e m ai le d t o t he m by O ct ob er 2 3, 2 00 6. In ad di ti on , th e Set tl in g P art ie s wer e requi redto publ is h t he Su m m ary Not ic e b y Nov em be r 6, 2 00 6, i n Th e Wall StreetJo urna l an d In ve st or ’s Bus in es s Dai ly. AIG Glo ba l h adpu rch as edap pr ox im at el y $1 80 m il li onof He al th So ut h d eb t se cu rit ie s dur in g t he cla ss pe rio d. Des pi te AIG Glo ba l’s s ig ni fic an t Hea lt hS ou th ho ld in gs an d i ts ap pa ren t d es ire to op t o utof t he set tl in g b on dh ol de r cl as s, AIG 4Glo ba l fa il edto m eetth e Dece m be r 8, 2 00 6 d ead li ne forop ti ng ou t o f th e cl as s. In st ead , onFri da y

Jan ua ry 5, 2 00 7—th e d ay

aft er the bl ow p ro vi si on ex pi redan d th ree d ay s b efo re the fai rn es s h eari ng —the di stric t co urt re cei ve d alet te r fro m Am eri canInt ern at io na l Gro up , Inc . (“ AIG”) reque st in g p erm is si on to op t o utof t he se tt le m en t b ecau se AIG Glo ba l al le ge dl y di d n otrece iv e n ot ic e o f th e Parti al Set tl em en t. OnJan ua ry

8, 2 00 7, atth e fai rn es s h eari ng , th e d is tri ctco urt h eardora l arg um en t o n AIG Gl ob al ’s m ot io n t o e nl arg e th e ti m e p erm it ti ng itto op t o utof t he se tt le m en t cl as s. On J anua ry

11 , 20 07 , th e d is tri ctco urt d en ie d AIG Gl ob al ’s un ti m el y reque st to op t o utof t he set tl em en t cl as s. Th e d is tri ctco urt d et erm in edth atAIG hadbo th actua l an d c on st ru ct iv e n ot ic e o f th e o pt -o utde ad li ne . The d is tri ctco urt n ot edth at AIG rece iv edat l eas t 1 2 c op ie s o f th e Cl as s No ti ce i n a dd it io n t o p ub li cat io n i n na ti on al ed it io ns of p ro m in en t b us in es s p ub li cat io ns . Furt he rm or e, th e d is tri ctco urt no te d t ha t AIG’s co un se l h adbe eninclo se co m m un ic at io n wi th Heal th So uth’s co un se l re ga rd in g t he ex is te nc e o f th e Parti al Settl em en t, b utAIG Glo ba l fa il edto ex erci se du e d il ig en ce an d m eetth e o pt -o utde ad li ne . In ad di ti on , th e d is tri ctco urt no te d t ha t al lo win g AIG Gl ob al ’s un ti m el y op t-o utreque stwou ldres ul t i n g reat pr ejud ic e to th e Set tl in g P art ie s b ecau se AIG Glo ba l’s $ 18 0 m il li on inbo nd s co ul d ha ve po te nt ia ll y

tri gg eredth e b lo w pro vi si on all owi ng Heal th So ut h t o t erm in at e th e 5se tt le m en t, b utHeal th So ut h’s d ead li ne to ex erci se th e te rm in at io n o pt io n h ad

pa ss ed . AIG Glo ba l fi le d am ot io n t o re co ns id er the Part ia l Fi na l Jud gm en t b as edin pa rt o n t he factth atth e Set tl em en t Ag reem en t an d t he Cla ss Not ic e d idno t i nc lu de th e p rel im in ary Pl anof Al lo cat io n c on ta in in g a n Ex cl us io n Dat e th atm ad e 6 5% o f AIG Glo ba l’s s ecurit ie s i ne li gi bl e fo r reco ve ry . The p rel im in ary Pl anof Al lo cat io n was part o f a s up pl em en ta l ag reem en t fo r es tabl is hi ng th e th res ho ldfortri gg eri ng th e b lo w pro vi si on . AIG Glob al arg ue s t ha t the Cla ss Not ic e was in va li d b ecau se th e Set tl in g P art ie s co nc eal edth e Exc lu si on Date . AIG Glob al co nt en ds th atit sh ou ldbe all owe d t o o ptou t o r th ata se co ndop t-o utop po rtu ni ty sho ul d b e g ran te d aft er the cla ss is no ti fie d o f th e fi na l Pl anof Al lo cat io n. Th e Cl as s No ti ce s ta te d th atth e Pl anof Al lo cat io n wo ul d b e subm it te d a t a l at er t im e an d tha t p art ie s wo ul d ha ve anop po rtu ni ty to o bjec t t o t he fai rn es s o f th e Pl anat alat er h eari ng . The di st ric t co urt d en ie d AIG Gl ob al ’s m ot io n fo r rec on si de rat io n b ecau se it fo un d tha t AIG Gl ob al ha d a de qu at e n ot ic e o f th e cl as s s et tl em en t. The di st ric t co urt d et erm in edth atth e Cl as s No ti ce d idno t h av e to in cl ud e th e p rel im in ary Pl an of All oc at io n b ecau se th e Pl anwas i n fa ctpre li min ary an d d ep en de nton on go in g ne go ti at io ns with t he Secu rit ie s an d Ex ch an ge Co m m is si on (“ SEC”) t o o bt ai n ad di ti on al m on ey

forth e cl as s. Fu rth erm or e, th e Cl as s No ti ce i nf orm edcla ss 6m em

be rs th atth e Pl anof Al lo cat io n wo ul d b e subm it te d l at er, an d c la ss m em be rs ha d t he ch oi ce o f op ti ng ou t i f th ey di d n otwantto joi n t he cla ss be cau se th e Pl anof All oc at io n h adno t yet be ensubm it te d. Fu rth erm or e, th e p rel im in ary Pl anof All oc at io n was crea te d t o c al cu la te th e b lo w pro vi si on , whi ch is tra di ti on al ly co nc eal edan d n otin cl ud edinth e Cl as s No ti ce. AIG Glo ba l ap pe al s t he Part ia l Fi na l J ud gm en t an d t he Reco ns id erat io n Ord er. 5 II. STANDARD OF REVIEW Whe th er the di st ric t co urt erredinde nyin g a n u nt im el y op t-o utreque stis rev ie wedun de r anab us e o f di sc ret io n s ta nd ard . Gril li v. Me tro . Life In s. Co ., 78 F.3 d 1 53 3, 1 53 8 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 6) . W e rev ie w th e d is tri ctco urt’s ex cu sabl e n eg le ct de ci si on s fo r anab us e o f di sc ret io n. Adva nc edEst im at in g S y s., In c. v. Ri ne y , 77 F.3 d 1 32 2, 1 32 5 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 6) . The d is tri ctco urt’s fi nd in gs of f actare re vi ewed fo r cl ear e rro r, an d i ts co nc lu si on s o f la w are re vi ewedde no vo . W ex le r v. And ers on , 45 2 F .3d12 26 , 12 30 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ). A di st ric t co urt’s d en ia l o f a m ot io n fo r rec on si de rat io n i s re vi ewedforan ab us e o f di sc ret io n. Co rwin v. WaltDin se y Co ., 47 5 F .3d12 39 , 12 54 (11 th Cir . Final Plans of Alloca

tion were eventua lly

submitt ed and a

pproved de termining 5 allocation of the Partial Settlement of the cla ss action and the SEC’s $100 million dis g org ement fund. AI G Global wa s the only class member

that attempted to opt out of the Partial Settlement and the only

class member

that objected to the f

airne ss of the Plan of Allocation. The district court de termined that the Plan of A llocation was fair. AI G Global appe aled that de cision also, but later dismissed its appeal. 720 07 ). Thi s C ou rt’s re vi ew of th e Cl as s No ti ce i s l im it edto whet he r th e d is tri ct co urt ab us edit s d is cret io n i n app ro vi ng th e Not ic e. Inre Co rru ga te d C on ta in er Ant itru stLit ig ., 64 3 F .2d19 5, 2 24 (5t h C ir. 1 98 1) ; cf. Ch ris to v. Pa dg et t, 2 23 F.3d 6 13 24 , 13 35 (11 th Cir . 20 00 ) (“ W e rev ie w an app ro va l o f a s et tl em en t ag reem en t un de r th e ab us e o f di sc ret io n s ta nd ard .”). III. DISC USSION A. Ju ris di ct io na l que st io ns As a p rel im in ary m atte r, we m us t ad dr es s t hr ee jur is di ct io na l que st io ns th at were ca rri edwith t he cas e: (1) whet he r th e Ma rch 22 , 20 07 ord er d en y in g AIG Glo ba l’s m ot io n fo r rec on si de rat io n i s i m m ed ia te ly app eal ab le ; (2 ) whe th er AIG Glo ba l h as pe rfec te d ati m el y ap pe al of t he Jan ua ry

11 , 20 07 Part ia l Fi na l J ud gm en t; an d (3 ) whe th er AIG Glo ba l h as st an di ng to ap pe al . Thi s C ou rt h as juri sd ic ti onto he ar thi s ap pe al be cau se th e d is tri ctco urt’s de ni al of AIG Gl ob al ’s un ti m el y op t-o utreque stwas apro pe rly certi fie d fi na l o rd er un de r Ru le 54 (b ) of

th e Fed eral Ru le s o f Ci vi l Pr oc edur e. The Se tt li ng Part ie s 7 co nt en d t ha t the Part ia l Fi na l J ud gm en t d idno t re so lv e AIG Glo ba l’s cl ai m s ag ai ns t

This Court adopted as bindingprec edent a ll decisions of the for mer F ifth Circuit 6 prior to Octobe r 1, 1981. B onner v. City of Prichar d, Ala., 661 F .2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir. 1981) (en ba nc). We also hold that the notice of a ppeal wa s timely . 7 8Heal th So ut h b ecau se th e d is tri ctco urt h adno t yet ru le d o n afin al Pla n o f

All oc at io n. Ho wev er, the Part ia l Fi na l J ud gm en t d idres ol ve sev eral cla im s; in pa rti cu la r, itco nc lu si ve ly det erm in edth atAIG Glo ba l was a cl as s m em be r an d co ul d n otbri ng sep arat e cl ai m s ag ai ns t Hea lt hS ou th . Cf. Arm st ro ng v. Marti n Mar ie tt a Co rp ., 13 8 F .3d13 74 , 13 88 n.2 9 (1 1th C ir. 1 99 8) (enbanc ) (n ot in g tha t a fin al jud gm en t s up po rti ng rev ie w of acla ss cert ifi cat io n d eci si on co ul d a ris e pu rs ua ntto a Ru le 54 (b ) certi fic at io n) . The u lt im at e d is tri bu ti on—an d AIG Glo ba l’s s ha re as a cl as s m em be r—o f th e $ 44 5 m il li on set tl em en t u nd er the fin al Pl anof Al lo cat io n h as no be ari ng on whet he r AIG Glo ba l was im pr op erl y de ni ed th e ri gh t t o o ptou t o f th e cl as s an d p ur su e cl ai m s s ep arat el y . The Parti al Fin al 8 Ju dg m en t, i nc lu di ng th e d en ia l o f AIG Glo ba l’s unt im el y op t-o utreque st , was a fin al ord er an d was pro pe rly certi fie d u nd er Ru le 54 (b ). AIG Glo ba l h as st an di ng to ap pe al th e d en ia l o f it s u nt im el y reque stto op t ou t o f th e se tt le m en t cl as s. As a m at te r of co m m on sen se , AIG Glo ba l i s t he on ly pa rty tha t co ul d app eal th e d is tri ctco urt’s d en ia l o f it s u nt im el y reque stto op t o utof th e cl as s. Th e Supr em e Co urt h as he ldth atth e ri gh t o f un na m edcla ss m em be rs to ap pe al a se tt le m en t d oe s n otrai se juri sd ic ti on al or s ta nd in g i ss ue s b ecau se cla ss

The Plan of Allocation has since bee n submitt ed to, and a pproved by , the district 8 court, but it had not bee n submitt ed at the time of this appeal. AI G Global wa s not give n a second oppor

tunity to opt out, and its obj ections to the Plan of Allocation werereje cted. 9m em

be rs ha ve su ffi ci en t i nt eres t t o m eetth e requi rem en ts of i nju ry , cau sa ti on , and redres sabi li ty, an d unn am edcla ss m em be rs are b ou ndby the jud gm en t. Dev li n v . Scar de ll et ti , 53 6 U.S. 1 , 6-7 , 12 2 S . Ct. 2 00 5, 2 00 9 (2 00 2) . The fac t tha t AIG Glo ba l’s o pt -o utreque stwas u nt im el y do es no t el im in at e AIG Glo ba l’s s ta nd in g t o ap pe al th e d en ia l o f th e unt im el y reque st . AIG Glob al reque st edad di ti on al ti m e to op t o utbe cau se itall eg ed ly didno t re cei ve ti m el y no ti ce. AIG Glo ba l h as st an di ng to ha ve th is Co urt d et erm in e whe th er the di st ric t co urt erredinfin di ng th atAIG Glo ba l re cei ve d a ctua l o r co ns tru ct iv e n ot ic e an d i n d eny in g i ts m ot io n fo r reco ns id erat io n. 9 B. The di stric t co urt’s d en ia l o f AIG Glo ba l’s o ptou t AIG Glo ba l m ad e se ve ral ch al le ng es to th e d is tri ctco urt’s d en ia l o f it s un ti m el y op t-o utreque stan d m ot io n fo r reco ns id erat io n. Fi rs t, AIG Glo ba l co nt en ds th atth e d is tri ctco urt cl earl y erredinde te rm in in g t ha t AIG Gl ob al ha d actua l an d c on st ru ct iv e n ot ic e o f th e se tt le m en t. The di stric t co urt fo un d t ha t AIG Glo ba l h adactua l n ot ic e b ecau se itrece iv edat l eas t 1 2 c op ie s o f th e Cl as s No ti ce th ro ug h i ts affi li at es an d o th er en ti ti es . Furt he rm or e, th e d is tri ctco urt fo un d t ha t AIG Glo ba l h adco ns tru ct iv e n ot ic e b ecau se su m m ary no ti ce was publ is he d i n se ve ral pro m in en t n ews pape rs , andAIG Glo ba l’s co un se l was inreg ul ar co nt act

Acc ording ly , all jurisdictional challeng es ar e re jected. 9 10with Hea lt hS ou th ’s cou ns el ab ou t the set tl em en t. The di stric t co urt’s fi nd in gs th at

AIG Glo ba l h adactua l an d c on st ru ct iv e n ot ic e were n otcle arl y erro ne ou s. Seco nd , AIG Glo ba l co nt en ds th atth e d is tri ctsh ou ldha ve en larg edit s o pt ou t t im e due to ex cu sabl e n eg le ct . Excu sabl e n eg le ctis anequi tabl e d et erm in at io n th atrequi res anex am in at io n i nt o wh ethe r th e m ov in g p arty ha d ago odreas on for no t re sp on di ng ti m el y

an d wh ethe r th e o pp os in g p arty wou ldbe pre

jud ic ed . In re W or ldwid e Web Sy s., In c., 32 8 F .3d12 91 , 12 97 (11 th Cir . 20 03 ); s ee al so W al te r v. Bl ue Cro ss & Bl ue Sh ie ldUni te d o f W is ., 18 1 F .3d11 98 , 12 01 (11 th Cir . 19 99 ) (li st in g t he rel ev an t fa ct or s as (1) th e d an ge r of pre jud ic e, (2 ) th e le ng th of d el ay an d it s p ot en ti al im

pa ctonth e p ro ceed in gs , (3) th e rea so n fo r th e d el ay , and(4) whet he r th e m ov an t ac te d i n g oo d fa it h) . The d is tri ctco urt d et erm in edth atth e Set tl in g Part ie s wo ul d h av e b een pre jud ic edbe cau se AIG Glo ba l’s h ol di ng s co ul d h av e b een su ffi ci en t t o t rig ge r th e b lo w pro vi si on—al lo win g Hea lt hS ou th to termin at e th e se tt le m en t—

bu t AIG Gl ob al att em

pt edto op t o utaft er the de ad li ne ha d p as se d fo r Heal th So ut h t o t erm in at e th e Set tl em en t. The di st ric t co urt’s fi nd in g t ha t the Set tl in g P art ie s wo ul d h av e b een pre jud ic edwas n otcle arl y

erro ne ou s. Fu rth erm or e, AIG Glo ba l d idno t h av e a g oo d re as on forfai li ng to ti m el y op t o ut . AIG Glo ba l i s a s op hi st ic at edparty with ex te ns iv e h ol di ng s atis su e in th is li ti ga ti on , andco un se l’s fa il ur e to op t o utbe fo re the de ad li ne was i ne xc us ab le . The 11di st ric t co urt d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n i n re fu si ng to ex te ndAIG Glo ba l’s t im e to

op t o ut . Fi na ll y , AIG Glo ba l co nt en ds th atth e Cl as s No ti ce was de fect iv e fo r fai li ng to in cl ud e th e p rel im in ary Pl anof Al lo cat io n c on ta in in g a n Ex cl us io n Dat e th at ex cl ud ed65 % of AIG Gl ob al ’s ho ld in gs fro m reco ve ry . AIG Glo ba l co nt en ds th at

1 0 th e Pri va te Secu rit ie s Li ti ga ti on Refo rm Act (“ PSLRA”) an d R

ul e 2 3 o f th e Fed eral Ru le s o f Ci vi l Pr oc edur e requi re the di sc lo su re o f th e Pl anof Al lo cat io n andth e Exc lu si on Date inth e Cl as s No ti ce. See 15 U.S.C. § 7 8u -4 (a)( 5) (al lo win g fi li ng s un de r se al of t he term s an d p ro vi si on s o f se tt le m en t ag reem en ts on ly whe n g oo d cau se ha s b een sh own be cau se “publ ic at io n o f a t erm or p ro vi si on of aset tl em en t ag reem en t wo ul d c au se di rectan d s ub st an ti al harm to an y party”); Fe d. R. C iv . P. 23 (e)( 3) (“ The pa rti es see ki ng ap pr ov al m us t fi le a st at em en t i de nt ifyin g a ny ag reem en t m ad e in co nn ect io n wi th th e p ro po sa l.”) . Rul e 2 3 re qu ire s t he co urt t o

“ di rectto cla ss m em

be rs th e b es t n ot ic e th atis pra ct ic ab le un de r th e ci rcu m st an ces , in cl ud in g i nd iv idua l n ot ic e to all m em be rs who canbe id en ti fie d t hr ou ghreas on ab le effo rt.” Fed . R. Civ . P. 23 (c)( 2) (B). No ti ce t o c la ss m em be rs m us t “ co nt ai n

AI G Global has a cknowledg ed that it had eve ry intention of opting out of the c lass 1 0 well in advanc e of the alleg edly defe ctive Class Notice a

nd befor e it was a

war e of theEx clusion Date. A I G Global is attemptingto circumve nt its original fa ilure to comply with the opt-out deadline while admitting that it had eve ry intention of opting out without any reg ard f or the eventua l Plan of Allocation. 12in fo rm at io n re as on ab ly neces sa ry to m ak e a d eci si on to rem ai n acla ss m em be r an d be bo un d b y

th e fi na l ju dg m en t o r op t o utof the act io n.” Twigg v. Se ars , Roe bu ck & Co ., 15 3 F .3d12 22 , 12 27 (11 th Cir . 19 98 ) (quo ti ng In r e Nis sa n M ot orCo rp . Ant itru stLit ig ., 55 2 F .2d10 88 , 11 05 (5t h C ir. 1 97 7) . The di st ric t co urt h adreas on ab le gro un ds to withh ol d t he pre li m in ary Pl anof All oc at io n fr om

th e Cl as s No ti ce. The Pla n o f All oc at io n was pre li m in ary—th e fin al Plan o f All oc at io n was de pe nd en t o n o th er o ng oi ng ne go ti at io ns —an d p orti on s of th e Pl anwere n eces sa ril y co nf id en ti al to av oi d re ve al in g d et ai ls ab ou t the bl ow pr ov is io n. Altho ug h t he Excl us io n Dat e d idno t n eedto be ke ptco nf id en ti al to 1 1 co nc eal th e b lo w pro vi si on , we can no t co nc lu de th atth e d is tri ctco urt ab us edit s di sc ret io n. Th e Cl as s No ti ce ex pr es sl y in fo rm edcla ss m em

be rs th atth e Pl anof All oc at io n wo ul d b e d et erm in edat alat er d at e. If AIG Glo ba l, o r an y ot he r cl as s m em be r, ne ed edto ob ta in th e Pl anof Al lo cat io n b efo re ag reei ng to pa rti ci pa te in th e se tt le m en t, the n AIG Gl ob al co ul d h av e o pt edou t b as edon th e Set tl in g P art ie s fai lu re t o fi na li ze the Plan o f All oc at io n p rio r to th e Cl as s No ti ce. Furth erm or e, it 1 2 The Supplemental Agree ment containingthe blow provision was identified to the 1 1 district court in the Stipulation of Partial Settl ement, mee ting the r equire ment of Rule 23(e )(3) that the Settling Parties identify agree ments made in conne ction with the settlement. AI G Global’s a lternative a rgument that it should be give n an additional 1 2 opportunity

to opt out, under Rule 23(e) (4), a fter submission of the fina l Plan of Allocation is without merit beca

use Rule 23(e )(4) addre sses a diff ere nt situation and the decision is wholly within the discretion of the district c ourt. See F ed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(4) ( addre ssing a situation in 13was co m

m on kn owl ed ge , andAIG Glo ba l was ful ly aware, th atbo nd s h el d p as t the Exc lu si on Date ha d re bo un de d i n v al ue ; th eref or e, itsh ou ldha ve be enob vi ou s t o 1 3 AIG Glo ba l tha t l it tl e o r no all oc at io n wo ul d b e m ad e fo r th os e b on ds . The d is tri ct 1 4 co urt co m

pl ie d wi th th e PSLRA an d R ul e 2 3, an d t he di st ric t co urt d idno t ab us e it s di sc ret io n b y

ap pr ov in g the Cla ss Not ic e. The di st ric t co urt d idno t cl earl y err i n fi nd in g t ha t AIG Gl ob al ha d a ctua l an d co ns tru ct iv e n ot ic e o f th e se tt le m en t, an d t he di st ric t co urt d idno t ab us e it s di sc ret io n i n d en y in g AIG Gl ob al ’s un ti m el y op t o utreque stan d i ts m ot io n fo r reco ns id erat io n. IV. CONCLUSION Bas edon th e fo reg oi ng , we affi rm th e d is tri ctco urt’s d en ia l o f AIG Glo ba l’s un ti m el y op t-o utreque stan d t he de ni al of i ts m ot io n fo r rec on si de rat io n.

which the c lass was c ertified prior to approva l of a settlement a nd stating that “the cour

t may ref use to approve a settlement unless it aff ords a ne w opportunity

to reque st ex clusion to individual class members who ha d an ea rlier oppor

tunity to reque st ex clusion but did not do so”) (empha sis added).

L ead Plaintiffs re quest that this Court take judicial notice of a char t showing that 1 3 the bonds at issue – i.e., the 65% of AI G Global’s bonds for which no re cover

y was ha d beca

use of the Exclusion Date – suffe red no loss bec ause the value of the bonds had rebounded by the time of the Exclusion Date. We need not take judicial notice of thechar t beca use we are able to rea ch this conclusion without refe rring to the char

t. AI G Global’s a

rgument that it did not receive consideration for the re lease of its 1 4 claims is wholly

without merit beca

use, under

the settlement, AI G Global is entitled to rec overy for the 35% of its holdings that suffe red losses. 14AFFIR MED.

15