Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 17, 2025

Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corporation

Judge
Edward Chen
Docket
3:21-cv-01418
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Cat Brooks v. Thomson Reuters, Judge Chen required no further action after reviewing disclosures about a settlement administrator’s vendor relationship.

Who this affects

The order directly affects Angeion and the parties in the case. Its future disclosure expectations apply to Angeion, other settlement administrators, and parties involved in proposed settlements.

What happened

In Cat Brooks, et al. v. Thomson Reuters Corporation, the court reviewed a supplemental declaration about Angeion’s relationship with Blackhawk, the vendor for prepaid Mastercards.

The court said the information was sufficient and would not require further action from the parties or Angeion. It remained concerned about payments that vendors make to class-action administrators and possible conflicts of interest.

Judge Edward Chen said future settlement administrators should fully disclose related financial arrangements, and parties should ask administrators about those arrangements.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corporation · No. 3:21-cv-01418
Judge
Edward Chen
Date
Nov. 17, 2025

Background

The court received the Supplemental Weisbrot Declaration and exhibits concerning Angeion’s relationship with Blackhawk, the vendor for the prepaid Mastercards. The order identifies the matter as involving settlement administration and refers to Docket Nos. 288 and 291.

Court’s action

Based on the supplemental information, the court stated that it would not require further action from the parties or Angeion. The court nevertheless said that, in the future, Angeion and any other settlement administrator should fully disclose financial arrangements with third parties connected to administering a settlement. The court gave examples including disclosures made when bidding to become a settlement administrator and disclosures to the court considering the proposed settlement. The court also said the parties should affirmatively ask the settlement administrator about such arrangements.

Concern identified by the court

The court stated that it remained concerned about compensation paid by vendors to class-action administrators and the possibility of conflicting interests. The order does not decide the underlying claims between the plaintiffs and Thomson Reuters Corporation.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.