Vang v. KeyTronicEMS

Background

The court considered the parties’ joint motion for final approval of their collective and class action settlement and the plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. The settlement involved claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and state law. After a May 8, 2019 fairness hearing, the court reviewed the parties’ filings, arguments, settlement stipulation, and notice process.

Court’s Findings

The court found that it had jurisdiction over the litigation and the parties. It determined that the settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate and complied with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e) and due process. The court considered the merits of the plaintiffs’ case compared with the settlement terms, the defendants’ financial condition, the complexity and cost of further litigation, and the amount of opposition.

The court also found that the parties had adequately performed their settlement obligations. It concluded that the settlement notice was the best notice practicable under the circumstances and satisfied the requirements for the Fair Labor Standards Act collective action, the proposed Rule 23 class, and due process. The court found no collusion and determined that the settlement resulted from good-faith, arm’s-length negotiations concerning a genuine dispute.

Orders

The court approved the settlement in all respects, including the notice, the releases of the covered federal and state-law claims, and the total settlement amount. It directed the parties to perform their obligations under the settlement agreement.

The order provided that, except for Jessica Seim, the individuals listed in Exhibit 3 would constitute the settlement class and release the state-law claims covered by the agreement. The settling plaintiffs identified in Exhibit 1 would additionally release the federal claims covered by the agreement. The settling defendant and other covered defendant releasees were released from those claims, and the settling plaintiffs and settlement class members were barred and enjoined from bringing the released claims, including in a class or collective action.

The court awarded plaintiffs’ counsel $36,444.18 in attorneys’ fees and $4,533.84 in costs and expenses, finding the award fair and reasonable. The amounts were to be paid from the total settlement amount. The court also approved service payments of $500 to each named plaintiff, approved the allocation and distribution plan, and approved the National Employment Law Project as the recipient of certain uncashed checks and amounts attributable to class members who could not be located.

The court dismissed Jessica Seim’s claims and Moua Yang’s Fair Labor Standards Act claims without prejudice and without further costs. The limitations period for those claims was tolled for 30 days after the order. The court dismissed all remaining aspects of the litigation with prejudice and without further costs. It retained continuing jurisdiction over the settlement’s interpretation, implementation, enforcement, administration, and distribution, and directed the clerk to enter final judgment.

Effect of the Order

The order stated that the settlement and the order were not admissions of fault, wrongdoing, or liability, and that no final adjudication of those matters had occurred. It also stated that if the settlement were terminated, the orders would be vacated and the litigation would proceed as if no settlement had been attempted.

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright therefore approved the settlement and related payments, specified which claims were released or dismissed, reserved authority to oversee the settlement, and directed entry of final judgment.