(;+,%,7

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 1 of 16 PageID #:3680
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

TIMOTHY THOME, individually and on behalf 

of all others similarly situated, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

NOVATIME TECHNOLOGY, INC., 

 Defendant. 

Case No.: 1:19-CV-06256 

Hon. Matthew F. Kennelly 

[PROPOSED] FINAL APPROVAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT 

 This matter coming to be heard on Plaintiff Timothy Thome’s Unopposed Motion and 

Memorandum in Support of Final Approval of Class Action Settlement (the “Motion”) and Class 

Counsel’s Unopposed Petition for Approval of Attorneys’ Fees, Costs, and Service Award to the 

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

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

fully advised in the premises, 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED as follows: 

1. Unless otherwise noted, all capitalized terms in this Final Approval Order and 

Judgment (the “Final Approval Order”) shall have the same meaning as ascribed to them in the 

Class Action Settlement Agreement and Release (“Settlement Agreement”) between Plaintiff 

Timothy Thome (“Plaintiff”), for himself individually and on behalf of the Settlement Class, and 

Defendant NOVAtime Technology, Inc. (“Defendant” or “NOVAtime”). Plaintiff and Defendant 

are each referred to as a “Party” and are collectively referred to herein as the “Parties.” 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 2 of 16 PageID #:3681 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1367
2 

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

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

3. The Court preliminarily approved the Settlement Agreement by Preliminary 

Approval Order dated October 20, 2020. At that time, the Court preliminary certified a class of the 

following individuals: 

All individuals who were enrolled in a NOVAtime biometric timekeeping system 

and subsequently used a NOVAtime timeclock that utilized a fingerprint, handgeometry, or other biometric verification method in the State of Illinois between 

August 14, 2014, and October 19, 2020. 

Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) any Judge or Magistrate presiding over 

this Action and members of their families, (2) the defendant, defendant’s 

subsidiaries, parent companies, successors, predecessors, and any entity in which 

the defendant or its parents have a controlling interest, (3) persons who properly 

execute and file a timely request for exclusion from the Settlement Class, and (4) 

the legal representatives, successors or assigns of any such excluded persons. 

 

4. Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court finally 

certifies, for settlement purposes only, the Settlement Class. 

5. The Court has read and considered the papers filed in support of this Motion for 

entry of the Final Approval Order, including the Settlement Agreement and Exhibits thereto and 

supporting declarations. 

6. The Court held a Final Approval Hearing on March 4, 2021, at which time the 

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

in opposition to the Settlement. 

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

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

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

reasonable, was entered into in good faith, and is in the best interests of the Settlement Class in light of 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 3 of 16 PageID #:3682 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 2 of 15 PageID #:1368
3 

the complexity, expense, and duration of the litigation and the risks involved in establishing 

liability and damages in maintaining the class action through trial and appeal. The complex legal 

and factual posture of the Action, and the fact that the Settlement Agreement is the result of armslength negotiations between experienced attorneys familiar with the legal and factual issues of this 

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

8. The consideration provided under the Settlement Agreement constitutes fair value 

given in exchange for the Released Claims against the Released Parties. The Court finds that the 

consideration to be paid to Settlement Class Members is reasonable, considering the facts and 

circumstances of the claims and affirmative defenses available in the Action and the potential risks 

and likelihood of success of alternatively pursuing litigation on the merits.

9. The Court hereby finally approves the Settlement Agreement in the total amount of 

Fourteen Million One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($14,100,000.00), consistent and pursuant to the 

terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement, including but not limited to the Confession of 

Judgment and Assignment of all of NOVAtime and its parent company Ascentis Corporation’s 

rights under the applicable and relevant insurance policies as fully described in the Settlement 

Agreement. (See Exhibit 1 – NOVAtime Technology, Inc., Ascentis Corporation, and Ascentis 

Holdings, LP Confession of Judgment (“Confession of Judgment”).

10. The persons who are listed on Exhibit A to this Order have made timely and valid 

requests for exclusion and are excluded from the Settlement Class and are not bound by this Final 

Approval Order. 

11. For settlement purposes only, the Court confirms the appointment of Plaintiff 

Timothy Thome as Class Representative of the Settlement Class. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 4 of 16 PageID #:3683 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 3 of 15 PageID #:1369
4 

12. For settlement purposes only, the Court confirms the appointment of the following 

counsel as Class Counsel, and finds they are experienced in class litigation and have adequately 

represented the Settlement Class: 

Ryan F. Stephan 

James B. Zouras 

Andrew C. Ficzko 

STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP 

100 N. RIVERSIDE PLAZA, SUITE 2150 

Chicago, Illinois 60606 

Tel: 312-233-1550 

rstephan@stephanzouras.com 

jzouras@stephanzouras.com 

aficzko@stephanzouras.com 

Brandon M. Wise 

PEIFFER WOLF CARR KANE & CONWAY, APLC 

818 Lafayette Avenue, Floor 2 

St. Louis, Missouri 63104 

Tel: 314-833-4825 

bwise@peifferwolf.com 

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

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

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

common questions predominate over any questions affecting only individual members; (c) the 

Class Representative and Class Counsel have fairly and adequately protected, and will continue to 

fairly and adequately protect, the interests of the Settlement Class; and (d) certification of the 

Settlement Class is an appropriate method for the fair and efficient adjudication of this Action. 

14. The Court has determined that the Notice given to the Settlement Class Members, 

in accordance with the Preliminary Approval Order and Amended Preliminary Approval Order, 

fully and accurately informed Settlement Class Members of all material elements of the Settlement 

and constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances; was reasonably calculated, 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 5 of 16 PageID #:3684 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 4 of 15 PageID #:1370
5 

under the circumstances, to apprise the Settlement Class of the pendency of the Action and their 

rights to object to or exclude themselves from the Settlement Class and to appear at the Final 

Approval Hearing; was reasonable, and constituted due, adequate, and sufficient notice to all 

persons entitled to receive notice; and fully satisfied the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure, applicable law, and the Due Process Clauses of the U.S. Constitution 

and Illinois Constitution. 

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

obligations thereunder. The Parties and Settlement Class Members are bound by the terms and 

conditions of the Settlement Agreement. 

16. The Court dismisses the Action with prejudice and without costs (except as 

otherwise provided herein and in the Settlement Agreement). 

17. In this Order: 

a. “Released Claims” means any and all claims, demands, liabilities, rights, causes of 

action, damages, punitive, exemplary or multiplied damages, expenses, costs, attorneys’ fees 

and/or obligations, whether in law or in equity, accrued or unaccrued, direct, individual or 

representative, of every nature and description whatsoever, whether based on the Illinois Biometric 

Information Privacy Act or other federal, state, local, statutory or common law or any other law, 

against the Released Parties, or any of them, arising out of or relating to actual or alleged facts, 

transactions, events, matters, occurrences, acts, disclosures, statements, representations, omissions 

or failures to act regarding the collection, capture, storage, use, profit from, possession, disclosure, 

and/or dissemination of biometric data, including all claims that were brought or could have been 

brought in the Action, belonging to any and all Releasing Parties. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 6 of 16 PageID #:3685 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 5 of 15 PageID #:1371
6 

b. “Released Parties” means NOVAtime, Ascentis Corporation, Ascentis Holdings, 

LP and their current and former owners, parents, subsidiaries, divisions, officers, directors, 

shareholders, agents, employees, attorneys, predecessors, and successors. This release also applies 

to Ptarmigan Underwriting Agency and related Underwriters limited solely to Ptarmigan 

Technology, Network Security and Privacy Liability Insurance Policy No. 

PUA19CP134AR/PUA19TP134AR issued to Ascentis Holdings, LP (collectively, “Ptarmigan”) 

and Ptarmigan reinsurers. 

 Released Parties shall not include any entity that manufactured, sold, or otherwise 

provided NOVAtime with any finger-scan and/or hand-scan technology, or any portion thereof 

(whether software or hardware), even if such an entity would fall within this definition. 

 Released Parties shall not include NOVAtime’s clients, even if such client would 

fall within this definition. This exclusion includes, but is not limited to, all Illinois employers or 

other entities to whom NOVAtime leased, sold, or otherwise provided finger-scan and/or handscan timeclocks, and any service involving finger and/or hand data related to such timeclocks. 

 Released Parties shall not include Axis Insurance Company and/or those 

Underwriters that issued the Axis Policy No. MLN635765/ 01/2019 and Axis Policy No. P-001-

000247286-01 (collectively “Axis”) as well as Axis’ reinsurers and CNA, even if such an entity 

would fall within this definition. To the extent any of the Ptarmigan reinsurers are the same as 

Axis reinsurers, such reinsurers are not released. 

c. “Releasing Parties” means Plaintiff and other Settlement Class Members and their 

respective past, present and future heirs, children, spouses, beneficiaries, conservators, executors, 

estates, administrators, and assigns. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 7 of 16 PageID #:3686 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 6 of 15 PageID #:1372
7 

18. Upon the Effective Date, the Releasing Parties shall be deemed to have released, 

and by operation of the Final Approval Order shall have, fully, finally, and forever released, 

acquitted, relinquished and completely discharged any and all Released Claims against the 

Released Parties, or any of them. 

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

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

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

or on behalf of Plaintiff and all other Settlement Class Members who did not validly and timely 

exclude themselves from the Settlement, and their respective predecessors, successors, affiliates, 

spouses, heirs, executors, administrators, agents and assigns of each of the foregoing, as set forth 

in the Settlement Agreement. The Released Parties may file the Settlement Agreement and/or this 

Final Approval Order in any action or proceeding that may be brought against them in order to 

support a defense or counterclaim based on principles of res judicata, collateral estoppel, release, 

good faith settlement, judgment bar or reduction, or any other theory of claim preclusion or issue 

preclusion or similar defense or counterclaim. 

20. Plaintiff and Settlement Class Members who did not validly and timely request 

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

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

Settlement Agreement against any of the Released Parties. 

21. The Court approves payment of Class Counsel’s attorneys’ fees in the amount of 

$1,365,300.00 and costs in the amount of $23,401.52. This amount shall be paid from the 

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

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

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 8 of 16 PageID #:3687 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 7 of 15 PageID #:1373
8 

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

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

reasonable for the following reasons: First, the Court finds that the Settlement provides substantial 

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

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

was negotiated in good faith at arms-length without collusion, and that the negotiation of the 

attorneys’ fees only followed agreement on the settlement benefits for the Settlement Class 

Members. Finally, the Court notes that the Notice specifically and clearly advised the Settlement 

Class that Class Counsel would seek an award up to the amount sought. 

22. The Court approves settlement administration expenses in an amount not to exceed 

$150,000.00. 

23. The Court approves an incentive award in the amount of $7,500.00 (Seven 

Thousand Five Hundred Dollars) for the Class Representative, and specifically finds such amount 

to be reasonable in light of the services performed by Plaintiff for the Settlement Class, including 

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

Settlement Class. This amount shall be paid from the Settlement Fund in accordance with the terms 

of the Settlement Agreement. 

24. To the extent a cy pres award is made pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, such 

award will be distributed as follows: 50% to Greater Chicago Food Depository and 50% to 360 

Youth Services. 

25. Neither this Final Approval Order, nor the Settlement Agreement, nor the payment 

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

or concession by or against Defendant or any of the other Released Parties of any fault, omission, 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 9 of 16 PageID #:3688 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 8 of 15 PageID #:1374
9 

liability, or wrongdoing, or of the validity of any of the Released Claims as set forth in the 

Settlement Agreement. This Final Approval Order is not a finding of the validity or invalidity of 

any claims in this Action or a determination of any wrongdoing by Defendant or any of the other 

Released Parties. The Final Approval Order approving the Settlement does not constitute any 

position, opinion, or determination of this Court, one way or another, as to the merits of the claims 

or defenses of Plaintiff, the Settlement Class Members, or Defendant. 

26. The objection to the Settlement Agreement is overruled and denied in all respects. 

The Court finds that no reason exists for delay in entering this Final Approval Order. Accordingly, 

the Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to enter this Final Approval Order. 

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

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

implementing documents (including all Exhibits to the Settlement Agreement) so long as they are 

consistent in all material respects with this Final Approval Order and do not limit the rights of the 

Settlement Class Members. 

28. Without affecting the finality of this Final Approval Order for purposes of appeal, 

the Court retains jurisdiction as to all matters relating to administration, consummation, 

enforcement and interpretation of the Settlement Agreement and the Final Approval Order, and 

for any other necessary purpose. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

ENTERED: __________________ _________________________ 

 Hon. Matthew F. Kennelly 

 United States District Court Judge 

 Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 10 of 16 PageID #:3689 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 9 of 15 PageID #:1375
&9)*#*5

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 11 of 16 PageID #:3690 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 10 of 15 PageID #:1376
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

TIMOTHY THOME, individually and on 

behalf of all others similarly situated,

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

NOVATIME TECHNOLOGY, INC., 

 Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

 

 Case No. 1:19-cv-06256 

 Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly 

 

DEFENDANTS’ NOVATIME TECHNOLOGY, INC., ASCENTIS CORPORATION, 

AND ASCENTIS HOLDINGS, LP CONFESSION OF JUDGMENT 

I, Aditya Bharadwaj, General Counsel of NOVAtime Technology, Inc. and Ascentis 

Corporation, and I, Brandon Grinwis, Chief Financial Officer of Ascentis Holdings, LP 

(hereinafter collectively referred to as “NOVAtime”), do and hereby confess judgment on behalf 

of NOVAtime and in favor of Timothy Thome, individually and on behalf of all those similarly 

situated, for the sum of Fourteen Million One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($14,100,000.00), and 

do authorize Judge Matthew F. Kennelly, or any judge sitting in his stead in the United States 

District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, to enter judgement for such sum against 

NOVAtime, jointly and severally, in favor of Timothy Thome, individually and on behalf of all 

those similarly situated, on this confession. 

This Confession of Judgment is for money justly due to Timothy Thome and a class of 

similarly situated individuals, arising from the following facts: 

(a) Timothy Thome filed this putative class action against NOVAtime; 




		

 Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 12 of 16 PageID #:3691 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 11 of 15 PageID #:1377
(b) Aditya Bharadwaj is the General Counsel of NOVAtime Technology, Inc. and has the 

right and authority to bind NOVAtime Technology, Inc. to the terms of this Confession 

of Judgment and willingly does so. 

(c) Aditya Bharadwaj is the General Counsel of Ascentis Corporation and has the right and 

authority to bind Ascentis Corporation to the terms of this Confession of Judgment and 

willingly does so. 

(d) Brandon Grinwis is the Chief Financial Officer of Ascentis Holdings LP and has the 

right and authority to bind Ascentis Holdings, LP to the terms of this Confession of 

Judgment and willingly does so. 

(e) NOVAtime is represented by experienced counsel in this matter, and further has inhouse counsel that has offered advice on this matter. 

(f) The Amended Class Action Complaint (Dkt. No. 45) alleges various causes of action 

arising from violations of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”) 740 

ILCS 740/1, et seq. 

(g) For purposes of this Confession of Judgment, NOVAtime admits the allegations in the 

Amended Class Action Complaint. 

(h) BIPA provides a prevailing party may recover for each violation against a private entity 

that negligently violates a provision of this Act, liquidated damages of $1,000 or actual 

damages, whichever is greater. 740 ILCS 14/20. 

(i) For purposes of this Confession of Judgment, NOVAtime admits that Timothy Thome 

is a prevailing party for purposes of BIPA. 




		

 Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 13 of 16 PageID #:3692 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 12 of 15 PageID #:1378
(j) NOVAtime admits that it captured, collected, stored and disseminated the biometric 

data of approximately 62,078 Illinois citizens, including Timothy Thome and those 

similarly situated. 

(k) For purposes of this Confession of Judgment, NOVAtime admits that the statutory 

damages for one negligent violation of BIPA for the 62,078 Illinois citizens referenced 

above is $62,078,000. 

(l) NOVAtime has agreed to settle the Class Action Litigation for the sum of Fourteen 

Million One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($14,100,000.00). 

(m)Timothy Thome and those similarly situated agree that other than Four Million One 

Hundred Thousand Dollars ($4,100,000.00), Plaintiff will not seek to enforce the 

remaining balance of this Confession of Judgment against NOVAtime, Ascentis 

Corporation, Ascentis Holdings, and/or Ptarmigan. 

(n) For purposes of this Confession of Judgment, NOVAtime admits that their liability 

exposure to Timothy Thome and those similarly situated under BIPA (740 ILCS 14/20) 

is at least $14,100,000.00. 

Dated: ___________________________________________ 

ADITYA BHARADWAJ, OFFICER OF 

NOVATIME TECHNOLOGY, INC. 

Dated: ______________________ 

ADITYA BHARADWAJ, OFFICER OF ASCENTIS 

CORPORATION 

Dated: 

BRANDON GRINWIS, OFFICER OF ASCENTIS 

HOLDINGS, LP 




		



	

	

	

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 14 of 16 PageID #:3693 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 13 of 15 PageID #:1379
&9)*#*5"

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 15 of 16 PageID #:3694 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 14 of 15 PageID #:1380
EXHIBIT A 

Individuals who have timely submitted a request to be excluded from 

the Settlement Class: 

1. Abel Hernandez; 

2. Teresa Prudencio Hernandez; and 

3. Vincent Broenneke. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-7 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 16 of 16 PageID #:3695 Case: 1:19-cv-06256 Document #: 90 Filed: 03/08/21 Page 15 of 15 PageID #:1381