In re TRANSPACIFIC PASSENGER AIR TRANSPORTATION ANTITRUST LITIGATION

Background

Plaintiffs’ counsel filed a third and final motion for attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses in connection with a settlement with ANA, the last remaining defendant in the 12-year litigation. The court had already approved two earlier rounds of fees and expenses. For the third settlement, counsel requested $18,647,081.15, or 33% of a $56,506,306.52 net settlement fund, plus $157,898.48 in unreimbursed expenses.

The court explained that Rule 23(h) allows reasonable fees and expenses in a class action. In the Ninth Circuit, courts generally use a percentage of the settlement fund and cross-check the result against the lodestar—the reasonable hours worked multiplied by reasonable hourly rates. The Ninth Circuit uses 25% as a benchmark but requires consideration of the case-specific circumstances.

Attorneys’ Fees

The court considered the results achieved, litigation risks, counsel’s skill and quality of work, the contingent nature and financial burden of the representation, fee awards in similar cases, empirical studies, and the lodestar cross-check.

The court found that the case was complex and heavily litigated. Counsel had conducted extensive discovery, defended against summary-judgment motions and appeals, handled class-certification challenges, prepared for trial against ANA, and participated in extensive mediation. The settlement with ANA was the largest settlement in the litigation and provided a significant benefit to the plaintiff classes.

At the same time, the court found that the final settlement round involved less work and less risk than the earlier stages. Counsel had already received two fee awards and had access to a litigation fund. The court also considered evidence that percentage fees generally decrease as settlement amounts increase, while recognizing that the Ninth Circuit had rejected a rigid rule for large settlements.

The court used the cumulative lodestar for its cross-check. Counsel reported a cumulative lodestar of $45,152,522 and had previously received $20,038,071.51 in fees. The court concluded that the resulting cumulative lodestar ratio for the reduced award was reasonable.

Expenses

The court found that plaintiffs had provided categorized and itemized expense lists. It nevertheless found uncertainty about whether the litigation-fund expenses included a February 27, 2015 invoice from Nathan Associates, Inc., which the court had previously rejected. The court also found that Hausfeld’s travel expenses might be reasonable but were not itemized in enough detail to determine whether they were excessive.

Ruling

The court granted attorneys’ fees in the reduced amount of $14,126,576.64, equal to 25% of the third settlement’s net fund. This brought total fees across all three settlements to $34,164,648.15, or 25% of the total net settlement funds.

The court also granted the requested expenses, pending additional information. It required plaintiffs to provide details about the litigation vendor dispute and settlement and its effect on the litigation fund, clarify whether the previously rejected Nathan Associates invoice was included, and provide a detailed itemization of Hausfeld’s travel expenses.