Dickey v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.

Background

The plaintiffs, Tony Dickey and Paul Parmer, brought the case individually and on behalf of a proposed class against Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. The court considered the plaintiffs’ motion for final approval of the class-action settlement and their motion for attorneys’ fees, expenses, and incentive awards.

Settlement approval

The court found that it had authority over the parties and settlement class and that the venue was proper. It found that the notice program—which included mailed and emailed notices, publication, a digital media campaign, a settlement website, and a toll-free hotline—was reasonably calculated to inform class members about the litigation, the class certification, the settlement terms, and their rights to object or opt out. The court also found that the notice complied with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Due Process Clause.

The court found that the required notice to government officials under the Class Action Fairness Act, or CAFA, had been properly and timely provided, and that more than 90 days had passed before the final approval hearing.

The court finally approved the settlement in all respects. It found the agreement fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best interests of the settlement class. The settlement provided $12,100,000 in exchange for releases of the released claims. The court considered the disputed facts, asserted defenses, risks and likely costs of continued litigation, the amount of discovery, the case’s legal and factual complexity, the parties’ arm’s-length negotiations, and the reaction of class members. It found no improper collusion.

The parties were directed to carry out the settlement according to its terms. Six individuals—Jonathan Barrett, Justin Brubaker, Adriel Douglass, Christopher Galliart, Virginia A. Macgowan, and Matthew B. Nelson—requested exclusion from the settlement class. The final judgment therefore stated that those individuals would not be bound or affected by it.

Fees, awards, and costs

The court approved $3,025,000 in attorneys’ fees and $47,517.37 in expenses for class counsel. It found those amounts fair and reasonable under both the common-fund method and the lodestar method, which are two approaches courts use to assess attorneys’ fees.

The court also approved a $5,000 incentive award for each class representative, $2,482.85 in litigation costs for Tony Dickey, and $668,031.57 for Angeion, the settlement administrator, for notice and administrative costs. These payments were to be made from the settlement fund or as otherwise provided in the settlement agreement.

Release and judgment

The order made the settlement terms and releases binding on the named plaintiffs and all settlement class members who did not opt out, along with specified successors and related persons. Those members were barred from bringing or participating in actions based on the released claims or related facts. The order also stated that the settlement and judgment could be used to support defenses based on release, claim preclusion, issue preclusion, or similar doctrines.

The order provided that the settlement and related proceedings could not be used as evidence that Advanced Micro Devices admitted the alleged facts, the validity of the claims, liability, negligence, fault, or wrongdoing. It likewise did not establish that the class members’ claims had or lacked merit.

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. entered judgment under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 58 and 79, retained continuing and exclusive authority over the settlement’s interpretation, implementation, completion, and enforcement, and directed the clerk to send the order to counsel and close the case.