Court filing
Declaration of Steven Weisbrot — Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corporation (Dkt. 241.2)
Summary
The Declaration of Steven Weisbrot of Angeion Group re: Settlement Administration Protocol & Proposed Notice Plan, Document 241-2, filed 08/29/24 in Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC-KAW, Cat Brooks and Rasheed Shabazz v. Thomson Reuters Corporation, Northern District of California, 59 pages. Weisbrot states that he is the President and Chief Executive Officer at the class action notice and claims administration firm Angeion Group, LLC, and describes his notice experience. He states that the media campaign is designed to deliver an approximate 75.30% reach with an average frequency of 3.09 times each by delivering over 68 million impressions. The attachments include a Request for Exclusion form for people who resided in California between December 3, 2016 and a 2024 date, and an Exhibit E with online notice banners.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Declaration of Steven Weisbrot — Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corporation (Dkt. 241.2).”
Original at ecf.cand.uscourts.gov, No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC, Doc. 241-2. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/full-docket-brooks-thomsonreuters-cand-374304/2024-08-29-gov-uscourts-cand-374304-241-2-gov-uscourts-cand-374304-241-2/
, SHA-256 54193c1e0e408fab25fae4af534654ada0b62065fad30483257bf7d23d3ba046.Full text
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 1 of 59
1 Andre M. Mura (SBN 298541) Geoffrey A. Graber (SBN 211547)
Ezekiel S. Wald (SBN 341490) Karina G. Puttieva (SBN 317702)
2 GIBBS LAW GROUP LLP COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS &
1111 Broadway, Suite 2100 TOLL PLLC
3 1100 New York Ave. NW, Fifth Floor
Oakland, CA 94607
4 Telephone: (510) 350-9700 Washington, DC 20005
Facsimile: (510) 350-9701 Telephone: (202) 408-4600
5 amm@classlawgroup.com Facsimile: (202) 408-4699
zsw@classlawgroup.com ggraber@cohenmilstein.com
6 kputtieva@cohenmilstein.com
7
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class
8
9
10
11
12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
14
CAT BROOKS and RASHEED Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC-KAW
15 SHABAZZ, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated,
16
Plaintiffs, DECLARATION OF STEVEN WEISBROT
17 OF ANGEION GROUP
v. RE: SETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATION
18 PROTOCOL & PROPOSED NOTICE PLAN
THOMSON REUTERS CORPORATION,
19
Defendant.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 2 of 59
1 I, Steven Weisbrot, declare and state as follows:
2 1. I am the President and Chief Executive Officer at the class action notice and claims
3 administration firm Angeion Group, LLC (“Angeion”). Angeion specializes in designing,
4 developing, analyzing, and implementing large-scale, un-biased, legal notification plans.
5 2. I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein. In forming my opinions
6 regarding notice in this action, I have drawn from my extensive class action experience, as described
7 below.
8 3. I have been responsible in whole or in part for the design and implementation of
9 hundreds of court-approved notice and administration programs, including some of the largest and
10 most complex notice plans in recent history. I have taught numerous accredited Continuing Legal
11 Education courses on the Ethics of Legal Notification in Class Action Settlements, using Digital
12 Media in Due Process Notice Programs, as well as Claims Administration, generally. I am the author
13 of multiple articles on Class Action Notice, Claims Administration, and Notice Design in
14 publications such as Bloomberg, BNA Class Action Litigation Report, Law360, the ABA Class
15 Action and Derivative Section Newsletter, and I am a frequent speaker on notice issues at
16 conferences throughout the United States and internationally.
17 4. I was certified as a professional in digital media sales by the Interactive Advertising
18 Bureau (“IAB”) and I am co-author of the Digital Media section of Duke Law’s Guidelines and Best
19 Practices—Implementing 2018 Amendments to Rule 23 and the soon to be published George
20 Washington Law School Best Practices Guide to Class Action Litigation.
21 5. I have given public comment and written guidance to the Judicial Conference
22 Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure on the role of direct mail, email, broadcast media,
23 digital media, and print publication, in effecting Due Process notice, and I have met with
24 representatives of the Federal Judicial Center to discuss the 2018 amendments to Rule 23 and offered
25 an educational curriculum for the judiciary concerning notice procedures.
26 6. Prior to joining Angeion’s executive team, I was employed as Director of Class
27 Action Services at Kurtzman Carson Consultants, an experienced notice and settlement
28
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 3 of 59
1 administrator. Prior to my notice and claims administration experience, I was employed in private
2 law practice.
3 7. My notice work comprises a wide range of class actions that include product defects,
4 false advertising, data breach, mass disasters, employment discrimination, antitrust, tobacco,
5 banking, firearm, insurance, and bankruptcy cases.
6 8. I have been at the forefront of infusing digital media, as well as big data and advanced
7 targeting, into class action notice programs. Courts have repeatedly recognized my work in the design
8 of class action notice programs. A comprehensive summary of judicial recognition Angeion has
9 received is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
10 9. By way of background, Angeion is an experienced class action notice and claims
11 administration company formed by a team of executives that have had extensive tenures at five other
12 nationally recognized claims administration companies. Collectively, the management team at
13 Angeion has overseen more than 2,000 class action settlements and distributed over $15 billion to
14 class members. The executive profiles as well as the company overview are available at
15 www.angeiongroup.com.
16 10. As a class action administrator, Angeion has regularly been approved by both federal
17 and state courts throughout the United States and abroad to provide notice of class actions and claims
18 processing services.
19 11. Angeion has extensive experience administering landmark settlements involving
20 some of the world’s most prominent companies, including:
21 In re: Facebook, Inc Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation
22 Case No. 3:18-md-02843-VC (N.D. Cal.)
Meta agreed to pay $725 million to settle allegations that the social media company
23 allowed third parties, including Cambridge Analytica, to access personal information.
Angeion undertook an integrated in-app notification and media campaign to a class
24 in the hundreds of millions of individuals and processed 28.6 million claims, the most
claims filed in the history of class action. In fact, during the September 7, 2023 Final
25
Approval Hearing, U.S. District Judge Chhabria acknowledged the record number of
26 claims filed, stating, “I was kind of blown away by how many people made claims.”
27 In re Apple Inc. Device Performance Litigation
Case No. 5:18-cv-02827-EJD (N.D. Cal.)
28
2
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 4 of 59
1 Apple agreed to pay $310 million to settle allegations of diminished performance in
2 iPhone 6’s and 7’s. Angeion’s direct notification efforts were recognized as reaching
99%+ of the current and former owners of 129 million class devices. Millions of
3 claims were processed.
4 City of Long Beach, et al. v. Monsanto, et al.
Case No. 2:16-cv-03493-FMO-AS (C.D. Cal.)
5
Bayer agreed to pay $650 million to settle allegations of waterbodies impaired by
6 PCBs. Angeion’s notice administration was extraordinarily successful with direct
notice delivered to 99.7% of the class. The claims administration includes multiple
7 complex claims filing workflows for different funding allocations, including separate
fund for “special needs” claimants.
8
Beckett v. Aetna Inc.
9
Case No. 2:17-cv-03864-JS (E.D. Pa.)
10 A consolidated data breach class action that arose from the alleged improper
disclosure of Protected Health Information by a health insurer and previous claims
11 administrator, including confidential HIV-related information. Angeion provided
specialized training to our support team concerning the sensitive nature of the case
12 and underlying health information. Angeion implemented robust privacy protocols to
communicate with and verify the claims of the affected class members, including
13
anonymized notice packets and allowing claimants to lodge objections under
14 pseudonyms.
15 12. Angeion has extensive experience administering privacy settlements, notably:
16 Case Citation Case No. Court
17 Katz-Lacabe v. Oracle America Inc. (Proposed Administrator) 3:22-cv-04792 N.D. Cal.
Beckett v Aetna Inc. 2:17-cv-3864 E.D. Pa.
18 Vela, et al. v. AMC Networks Inc. 1:23-cv-02524 S.D.N.Y.
In re: Ashley Madison Customer Data Security Breach Litigation 4:15-md-02669 E.D. Mo.
19
In re: Blackhawk Network Data Breach Litigation 3:22-cv-07084 N.D. Cal.
20 In re: Facebook Inc. Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation 3:18-md-02843 N.D. Cal.
Salinas, et al. v. Block Inc., et al. 3:22-cv-04823 N.D. Cal.
21
Culbertson v. Deloitte Consulting LLP 1:20-cv-03962 S.D.N.Y.
22 Adkins v. Facebook Inc. 3:18-cv-05982 N.D. Cal.
Lundy, et al. v. Meta Platforms Inc. 3:18-cv-06793 N.D. Cal.
23
In re: Facebook Internet Tracking Litigation 5:12-md-02314 N.D. Cal.
24 Monegato v. Fertility Centers of Illinois PLLC 2022CH00810 Ill. Cir. Ct.
In re: Google Plus Profile Litigation 5:18-cv-06164 N.D. Cal.
25 In re: Herff Jones Data Breach Litigation 1:21-cv-01329 S.D. Ind.
26 Parris, et al. v. Meta Platforms Inc. 2023LA000672 Ill. Cir. Ct.
Heath, et al. v. Insurance Technologies Corp. and Zywave Inc. 3:21-cv-01444 N.D. Tex.
27
28
3
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 5 of 59
McDonald, et al. v. Kiloo A/S, et al.; 3:17-cv-04344;
1 Rushing, et al. v. The Walt Disney Co., et al.; 3:17-cv-04419; N.D. Cal.
Rushing, et al. v. ViacomCBS Inc., et al. 3:17-cv-04492
2
Rushing, et al. v. Kochava Inc. 2:21-cv-00322 D. Idaho
3 Doe, et al. v. Partners Healthcare System Inc., et al. 1984cv01651 Mass. Super. Ct.
Braun, et al. v. Philadelphia Inquirer LLC 2:22-cv-04185 E.D. Pa.
4
In re: Plaid Inc. Privacy Litigation 4:20-cv-03056 N.D. Cal.
5 Mehta v. Robinhood Financial Services LLC 5:21-cv-01013 N.D. Cal.
In re: Hanna Andersson and Salesforce.com Data Breach Litigation 3:20-cv-00812 N.D. Cal.
6
T.K. et al. v. Bytedance Technology Co. Ltd., et al. 1:19-cv-07915 N.D. Ill.
7 In re: TikTok Inc., Consumer Privacy Litigation 1:20-cv-04699 N.D. Ill.
In re: US Fertility LLC Data Security Litigation 8:21-cv-00299 D. Md.
8
9 DATA SECURITY & INSURANCE
10 13. Angeion recognizes the critical need to secure our physical and network environments
11 and protect data in our custody. It is our commitment to these matters that has made us the go-to
12 administrator for many of the most prominent data security matters of this decade. We are ever
13 improving upon our robust policies, procedures, and infrastructure by periodically updating data
14 security policies as well as our approach to managing data security in response to changes to physical
15 environment, new threats and risks, business circumstances, legal and policy implications, and
16 evolving technical environments.
17 14. Angeion’s privacy practices are compliant with the California Consumer Privacy Act,
18 as currently drafted. Consumer data obtained for the delivery of each project is used only for the
19 purposes intended and agreed in advance by all contracted parties, including compliance with orders
20 issued by State or Federal courts as appropriate. Angeion imposes additional data security measures
21 for the protection of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) and Personal Health Information (PHI),
22 including redaction, restricted network and physical access on a need-to-know basis, and network
23 access tracking. Angeion requires background checks of all employees, requires background checks
24 and ongoing compliance audits of its contractors, and enforces standard protocols for the rapid
25 removal of physical and network access in the event of an employee or contractor termination.
26 15. Data is transmitted using Transport Layer Security (TLS) 1.3 protocols. Network data
27 is encrypted at rest with the government and financial institution standard of AES 256-bit encryption.
28
4
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 6 of 59
1 We maintain an offline, air-gapped backup copy of all data, ensuring that projects can be administered
2 without interruption.
3 16. Further, our team conscientiously monitors the latest compliance requirements, such
4 as GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, and others, to ensure that our organization is meeting all necessary
5 regulatory obligations as well as aligning to industry best practices and standards set forth by
6 frameworks like CIS and NIST. Angeion is cognizant of the ever-evolving digital landscape and
7 continually improves its security infrastructure and processes, including partnering with best-in-class
8 security service providers. Angeion’s robust policies and processes cover all aspects of information
9 security to form part of an industry leading security and compliance program, which is regularly
10 assessed by independent third parties. Angeion is also committed to a culture of security mindfulness.
11 All employees routinely undergo cybersecurity training to ensure that safeguarding information and
12 cybersecurity vigilance is a core practice in all aspects of the work our teams complete.
13 17. Angeion currently maintains a comprehensive insurance program, including sufficient
14 Errors & Omissions coverage.
15 SUMMARY OF THE NOTICE PLAN
16 18. This declaration will describe the proposed Notice Plan for the Settlement Class that,
17 if approved by the Court, Angeion will implement in this matter, including the considerations that
18 informed the development of the plan and why we believe it will provide due process to Settlement
19 Class Members. In my professional opinion, the proposed Notice Plan described herein is the best
20 notice practicable under the circumstances, fulfilling all due process requirements, fully comporting
21 with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, and the Northern District’s Procedural Guidance for Class Action Settlements.
22 19. The Notice Plan provides for a comprehensive state-of-the-art multi-faceted media
23 campaign designed to deliver an approximate 75.30% reach and the implementation of a dedicated
24 Settlement Website and toll-free telephone line where Settlement Class Members can learn more
25 about their rights and options pursuant to the terms of the Settlement. This percentage is calculated
26 using objective syndicated advertising data relied upon by most advertising agencies and brand
27 advertisers. It is further verified by sophisticated media software and calculation engines that cross
28
5
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 7 of 59
1 reference which media is being purchased with the media habits of our specific Target Audience
2 (defined below). What this means in practice is that 75.30% of our Target Audience will see an
3 advertisement concerning the settlement an average of 3.09 times each.
4 20. The Federal Judicial Center states that a publication notice plan that reaches 70% of
5 class members is one that reaches a “high percentage” and is within the “norm.” Barbara J. Rothstein
6 & Thomas E. Willging, Federal Judicial Center, “Managing Class Action Litigation: A Pocket Guide
7 or Judges”, at 27 (3d Ed. 2010).
8 21. The comprehensive and multifaceted media campaign, which is described in greater
9 detail below, is the most reasonable and logical option for providing notice to the Settlement Class
10 that is practicable under the circumstances.
11 22. Angeion has been informed by the parties that the defendant is not in possession of a
12 suitable list of email addresses because the defendant’s CLEAR offering is not designed to provide
13 CLEAR customers with consumer email addresses.
14 23. The parties further considered whether notice via mail would be practicable here, and
15 again concluded it would not. Postage alone for mailing to a class of this size would be between
16 $15,000,000.00 and $18,000,000.00, which does not account for the cost of printing the notices
17 themselves. Additionally, given the class size, it is anticipated that there would be a large percentage
18 of notices returned by the United States Postal Service as undeliverable. This has a cascading effect
19 on the cost of administration, resulting in additional costs for receiving and processing notices
20 returned as undeliverable, performing address verification searches, printing new notices to be re-
21 mailed to any updated addresses if they can be located, and the postage for those re-mailed notices.
22 Therefore, as described below, the parties should rely on the media notification program outlined
23 utilizing advanced digital media tactics, social media, and search engine marketing.
24 MEDIA NOTICE
25 24. The robust media campaign is designed to deliver an approximate 75.30% reach with
26 an average frequency of 3.09 times each by delivering over 68 million impressions and will run for a
27 four (4) week period. The media campaign consists of state-of-the-art internet notice (“programmatic
28
6
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 8 of 59
1 display advertising”), social media notice via Facebook and Instagram, and a paid search campaign
2 via Google.
3 Programmatic Display Advertising
4 25. Angeion will utilize a form of internet advertising known as Programmatic Display
5 Advertising, which is the leading method of buying digital advertisements in the United States.1 In
6 laymen’s terms, programmatic advertising is a method of advertising where an algorithm identifies
7 and examines demographic profiles and uses advanced technology to place advertisements on the
8 websites where members of the Target Audience are most likely to visit (these websites are accessible
9 on computers, mobile phones, and tablets). The media notice outlined below is strategically designed
10 to provide notice of the Settlement to these individuals by driving them to the dedicated Settlement
11 Website where they can learn more about the Settlement, including their rights and options.
12 26. To develop the media notice campaign and to verify its effectiveness, our media team
13 analyzed data from 2023 comScore Multi-Platform/MRI Simmons USA Fusion2 to profile the
14 Settlement Class and arrive at an appropriate Target Audience based on criteria pertinent to this
15 Action. Specifically, the following syndicated research definition was used to profile potential
16 Settlement Class Members: Adults 18+ and State Group Codes: California.
17 27. Based on the syndicated research definition used, the size of the Target Audience is
18 approximately 29.25 million individuals. It is important to note that the Target Audience is distinct
19 from the Class definition, as is commonplace in class action notice plans. Using proxy audiences is
20
21
22
1
Programmatic Display Advertising is a trusted method specifically utilized to reach defined target audiences.
23 It is estimated that the U.S. programmatic digital display ad spend will total $157.35 billion in 2024. See
https://www.emarketer.com/insights/programmatic-digital-display-ad-spending/ (Last visited August 8, 2024).
24 2
GfK MediaMark Research and Intelligence LLC (“GfK MRI”) provides demographic, brand preference and
media-use habits, and captures in-depth information on consumer media choices, attitudes, and consumption of
25 products and services in nearly 600 categories. comSCORE, Inc. (“comSCORE”) is a leading cross-platform
measurement and analytics company that precisely measures audiences, brands, and consumer behavior,
26 capturing 1.9 trillion global interactions monthly. comSCORE’s proprietary digital audience measurement
methodology allows marketers to calculate audience reach in a manner not affected by variables such as cookie
27 deletion and cookie blocking/rejection, allowing these audiences to be reach more effectively. comSCORE
operates in more than 75 countries, including the United States, serving over 3,200 clients worldwide.
28
7
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 9 of 59
1 also commonplace in both class action litigation and advertising generally.3
2 28. Additionally, the Target Audience is based on objective syndicated data, which is
3 routinely used by advertising agencies and experts to understand the demographics, shopping habits
4 and attitudes of the consumers that they are seeking to reach.4 Objective syndicated data tools
5 guarantee that advertising placements can be measured against an objective basis and are ubiquitous
6 tools in a media planner’s arsenal. Understanding the socioeconomic characteristics, interests and
7 practices of a target group aids in the proper selection of media to reach that target. Here, the Target
8 Audience has been reported to have the following characteristics:
9 ➢ 52.49% are ages 25-54, with a median age of 45.9 years old;
10
➢ 50.64% are female;
➢ 48.26% are married;
11 ➢ 35.50% have children;
12
➢ 36.89% have received a bachelor’s or post-graduate degree;
➢ 46.97% are currently employed full time;
13 ➢ The median household income is $94,080; and
14
➢ 85.93% have used social media in the last 30 days.
15 29. To identify the best vehicles to deliver messaging to the Target Audience, the media
16 quintiles, which measure the degree to which an audience uses media relative to the general population
17 were reviewed. Here, the objective syndicated data shows that members of the Target Audience are
18 heavy internet users, spending an average of 30.1 hours per week on the internet.
19 30. Given the strength of digital advertising, as well as our Target Audience’s heavy
20 internet use, we recommend utilizing a robust internet advertising campaign to reach potential
21 Settlement Class Members.
22 31. Multiple targeting layers will be implemented into the programmatic campaign to help
23
3
If the total population base (or number of class members) is unknown, it is accepted advertising and
24 communication practice to use a proxy-media definition, which is based on accepted media research tools and
methods that will allow the notice expert to establish that number. Duke Law School, GUIDELINES AND
25 BEST PRACTICES IMPLEMENTING 2018 AMENDMENTS TO RULE 23 CLASS ACTION
SETTLEMENT PROVISIONS, at 56.
26 4
The notice plan should include an analysis of the makeup of the class. The target audience should be defined
and quantified. This can be established through using a known group of customers, or it can be based on a
27 proxy-media definition. Both methods have been accepted by the courts and, more generally, by the advertising
industry, to determine a population base. Id. at 56.
28
8
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 10 of 59
1 ensure delivery to the most appropriate users, inclusive of the following tactics:
2 ➢ Look-a-like Modeling: This technique uses data methods to build a look-a-like audience
against known Settlement Class Members.
3 ➢ Predictive Targeting: This technique allows technology to “predict” which users will be
served an advertisement about the Settlement.
4 ➢ Site Retargeting: This technique is a targeting method used to reach potential Settlement
5 Class Members who have already visited the dedicated Settlement Website while they
browse other pages. This allows for sufficient exposure to advertisements about the
6 Settlement.
➢ Geotargeting: The campaign will be targeted within the state of California With an
7 additional allocation both nationwide and the top six states where Californians have
relocated over the class period.5
8
9 Social Media Advertising
10 32. The social media campaign component of the proposed Notice Plan will utilize several
11 of the leading social media platforms in the United States: Facebook and Instagram.6 The social media
12 campaign capitalizes on the Target Audience’s propensity to engage in social media (85.93% of the
13 Target Audience have used social media in the last 30 days) and will run simultaneously with the
14 programmatic internet advertising portion of the media campaign.
15 33. The social media campaign will utilize specific tactics to further qualify and deliver
16 impressions to the Target Audience via the social media platforms’ desktop sites, mobile sites, and
17 mobile apps. For example, the Facebook Marketing platform and its technology will be used to serve
18 ads on both Facebook and Instagram against the Target Audience. Further, look-a-like modeling
19 allows the use of consumer characteristics to serve advertisements. Based on these characteristics, we
20 can build different consumer profile segments to ensure the notice plan messaging is delivered to the
21 proper audience on the social media platforms. The social media ads will be targeted nationwide. If
22 sufficient data is available, the campaign will be targeted within the state of California.
23
24 5
United Census Bureau: California State Profile
https://data.census.gov/profile/California?g=040XX00US06 (last visited August 12, 2024);
25 See also 2023 Allied US Moving Migration Report, https://www.allied.com/migration-map (Last visited
August 12, 2024).
26 6
Facebook is estimated to have over 250 million U.S. users, and Instagram over 169 million U.S. users.
See https://www.statista.com/statistics/408971/number-of-us-facebook-users (Last visited August 8, 2024)
27 https://www.statista.com/statistics/578364/countries-with-most-instagram-users/ (Last visited August 8,
2024).
28
9
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 11 of 59
1 Paid Search Campaign
2 34. The Notice Plan also includes a paid search campaign on Google to help drive
3 Settlement Class Members who are actively searching for information about the Settlement to the
4 Settlement Website. Paid search advertisements will complement the programmatic and social media
5 campaigns, as search engines are frequently used to locate a specific website, rather than a person
6 typing in the URL of the website they are searching for. Search terms would relate to not only the
7 class action itself but also the subject-matter of the litigation and the Settlement. In other words, the
8 paid search advertisements are driven by the individual user’s search activity, such that if that
9 individual searches for (or has recently searched for) the lawsuit, litigation or other terms related to
10 the Settlement, that individual could be served with an advertisement directing them to the dedicated
11 Settlement Website, where they can find more information about the Settlement.
12 SETTLEMENT WEBSITE
13 35. The Notice Plan provides for the creation of a case-specific Settlement Website where
14 Settlement Class Members can easily submit a Claim Form via a customized secure online portal. The
15 Settlement Website will also provide Settlement Class Members with general information about this
16 Settlement, including important dates and deadlines, and answers to frequently asked questions.
17 Settlement Class Members can also review or download relevant Court documents, including the Long
18 Form Notice7, the Claim Form, the Court’s Order Preliminarily Approving the Settlement, the
19 Settlement Agreement, the operative Complaint filed in this Action, and any other materials agreed
20 upon by the Parties and/or required by the Court.
21 36. The Settlement Website will also have a “Contact Us” page whereby Settlement Class
22 Members can send a message with any additional questions to a dedicated email address.
23 37. The Settlement Website will be designed to be ADA-compliant and optimized for
24 mobile visitors so that information loads quickly on mobile devices. Additionally, the Settlement
25 Website will be designed to maximize search engine optimization through Google and other search
26
27
7
Available in English and Spanish.
28
10
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 12 of 59
1 engines. Keywords and natural language search terms will be included in the Settlement Website’s
2 metadata to maximize search engine rankings.
3 TOLL-FREE TELEPHONE SUPPORT
4 38. A toll-free hotline devoted to this case will be implemented to further apprise
5 Settlement Class Members of their rights and options pursuant to the terms of the Settlement. The
6 toll-free hotline will utilize an interactive voice response (“IVR”) system to provide Settlement Class
7 Members with responses to frequently asked questions and provide essential information regarding
8 the Settlement. This hotline will be accessible 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
9 39. Additionally, Settlement Class Members will be able to leave a voicemail with their
10 name and address if they want the Long Form Notice and/or Claim Form mailed to them.
11 NOTICE PURSUANT TO THE CLASS ACTION FAIRNESS ACT OF 2005
12 40. Within ten (10) days of Plaintiffs’ filing of the Settlement Agreement and Release with
13 this Court, Angeion will cause notice to be disseminated to the appropriate state and federal officials
14 pursuant to the requirements of the Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. §1715.
15 PLAIN LANGUAGE NOTICE DESIGN
16 41. The proposed Notice forms used in this matter are designed to be “noticed,” reviewed,
17 and by presenting the information in plain language, understood by members of the Settlement Class.
18 The design of the notices follows the principles embodied in the Federal Judicial Center’s illustrative
19 “model” notices posted at www.fjc.gov. The Notice forms contain plain-language summaries of key
20 information about the rights and options of members of the Settlement Class pursuant to the
21 Settlement. Consistent with normal practice, prior to being delivered and published, all notice
22 documents will undergo a final edit for accuracy. Drafts of the Notice, Claim Form, Exclusion Form,
23 and sample banner advertisements are attached hereto as Exhibit B, Exhibit C, Exhibit D, and
24 Exhibit E, respectively.
25 42. Rule 23(c)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires class action notices to
26 be written in “plain, easily understood language.” Angeion Group maintains a strong commitment to
27 adhering to this requirement, drawing on its experience and expertise to craft notices that effectively
28
11
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 13 of 59
1 convey the necessary information to Settlement Class members in plain language.
2 CLAIMS RATE ANALYSIS
3 43. Angeion analyzed seven (7) past privacy and consumer settlements with class sizes in
4 the tens or hundreds of millions. The claims rates ranged from 1.13% to 7.08%, with an average claims
5 rate of 2.53%. Specifically, the claims rates for the In re: Facebook Inc. Consumer Privacy User Profile
6 Litigation, No. 3:18-md-02843 (N.D. Cal.) and the In re: Google Plus Profile Litigation, No. 5:18-cv-
7 06164 (N.D. Cal.) for meaningful perspective based on estimated class sizes in the hundreds of
8 millions. In the Facebook matter, Angeion received over 17.7 million claims (after fraud review and
9 deduplication), which resulted in an approximate claims rate of 7.08%; however, in the Google matter,
10 approximately 1.8 million claims were received, resulting in an approximate claims rate of 1.13%.
11 The notice plan in Facebook was able to utilize in-app notifications to reach class members with whom
12 Meta had a pre-existing relationship with and were accustomed to receiving in-app notifications from
13 Meta. The notice plan in Google included sending email notice directly to individuals who had a pre-
14 existing relationship with Google.
15 44. Angeion also considered the similarities between this settlement and the In re: Plaid
16 Inc. Privacy Litigation, No. 4:20-cv-03056 (N.D. Cal.), in which the defendant Plaid had an indirect
17 relationship with the settlement class. The notice plan in the Plaid matter also consisted of direct notice
18 and a comprehensive media plan. The approximate claims rate in Plaid was 1.28%.
19 45. Thus, Angeion estimates that the claims rate in this settlement will be between 1% -
20 2.5%, which is consistent with the claims rates in Plaid (1.28%) and Google (1.13%), as well as the
21 overall average claims rate (2.53%) of the seven (7) past privacy and consumer settlements Angeion
22 analyzed that involved class sizes in the tens or hundreds of millions.
23 FRAUD DETECTION
24 46. Angeion has developed and deployed a real-time fraud detection system,
25 AngeionAffirm, which is the first and only comprehensive solution to identify fraud in real time based
26 on both state-of-the-art technology and analysis of over a decade of historical claims data.
27 AngeionAffirm was developed to combat the rising tide of fraudulent claims in class action settlements
28
12
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 14 of 59
1 and the increasingly sophisticated technologies and techniques used by fraudulent actors in their
2 attempt to perpetuate fraud and will be implemented to detect fraudulent claim submissions in this
3 Settlement.
4 47. In addition to AngeionAffirm, Angeion’s strategic partner, ClaimScore, will be utilized
5 as part of the comprehensive anti-fraud efforts that will be deployed in this Settlement. ClaimScore is
6 the only independent software solution dedicated to resolving the fraudulent claim problem in class
7 action settlements. ClaimScore reviews each claim individually using its proprietary artificial
8 intelligence, machine learning, & cloud architecture in real-time. Each result is then reported
9 instantaneously in an interactive dashboard. Together, AngeionAffirm and ClaimScore will provide
10 industry-leading fraud detection services for this Settlement.
11 48. Courts have recognized the success of AngeionAffirm. By way of example, in the
12 Court’s July 26, 2024, Report and Recommendation, United States Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron
13 stated, “The Court finds that the claims process administered by Angeion has integrity and has been
14 carried out in a diligent and thorough manner…Based upon the Court’s review of the record, the Court
15 finds that Angeion has taken prudent and necessary steps to address the fraudulent claims submitted
16 in this case… Angeion’s fraud detection system is robust and appropriately designed to weed out
17 fraudulent claims.” (See In re: Novartis and Par Antitrust Litigation, No. 1:18-cv-04361-AKH-SDA,
18 S.D.N.Y, Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 667).
19 CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION & DISTRIBUTION OF SETTLEMENT PAYMENTS
20 49. Angeion shall receive and process Claim Form submissions. Angeion will review all
21 Claim Forms to determine their validity and each Claimant’s eligibility and shall employ reasonable
22 procedures to screen claims for abuse or fraud. Claim Forms that do not comply with the instructions
23 on the Claim Form, are not submitted by a member of the Settlement Class (i.e., third-party filers) or
24 are deemed to be duplicative or fraudulent shall be rejected.
25 50. Angeion shall establish and maintain a Qualified Settlement Fund (“QSF”) subject to
26 the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
27 51. Settlement Class Members can select from a variety of digital payment options, such
28
13
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 15 of 59
1 as Venmo, Zelle, ACH transfers, and virtual pre-paid cards.
2 52. The digital payment options are reliable, secure, and meet evolving claimant
3 preferences and contemporary payment methodologies. This includes banking solutions (Zelle/ACH),
4 digital-first (Venmo), as well as a pre-paid card option for the “unbanked” and “underbanked”.
5 53. According to a 2019 report by the Federal Reserve, millions of Americans are either
6 unbanked or underbanked. Six (6) percent of adults did not have a checking, savings, or money market
7 account (often referred to as the "unbanked"). Two-fifths of unbanked adults used some form of
8 alternative financial service during 2018—such as a money order, check cashing service, pawn shop
9 loan, auto title loan, payday loan, paycheck advance, or tax refund advance. In addition, sixteen (16)
10 percent of adults were "underbanked": they have a bank account but also used an alternative financial
11 service product associated with unbanked adults. The unbanked and underbanked are more likely to
12 have family income less than $40,000 (35%) or be in a racial or ethnic minority group (Black 49% or
13 Hispanic 34%). The pre-paid card product being used is designed specifically for class action usage
14 and includes the ability to transfer a remaining balance at any time for no fee.
15 54. Angeion will also accommodate Settlement Class Members who elect to have a
16 traditional check mailed to them in lieu of one of the digital payment options.
17 55. The payment transmission notice (e.g. email or check stub) will include information
18 about the payment.
19 ESTIMATED NOTICE AND ADMINISTRATION COSTS
20 56. Angeion estimates the cost to provide notice and administration services as described
21 herein will be approximately $469,000. The pricing details comprising the administration cost estimate
22 are competitively sensitive. Upon request, Angeion will provide its itemized estimate to the Court.
23 REACH AND FREQUENCY
24 57. This declaration describes the reach and frequency evidence which courts systemically
25 rely upon in reviewing class action publication notice programs for adequacy. The Notice Plan’s
26 designed reach percentage exceeds the guidelines as set forth in the Federal Judicial Center’s Judges’
27 Class Action Notice and Claims Process Checklist and Plain Language Guide to effectuate a notice
28
14
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 16 of 59
1 program which reaches a high degree of class members.
2 58. Specifically, the comprehensive media plan is designed to deliver an approximate
3 75.30% reach with an average frequency of 3.09 times each by serving approximately 68 million
4 impressions. The 75.30% designed reach does not include the Settlement Website, or toll-free
5 telephone support line.
6 59. The Federal Judicial Center states that a publication notice plan that reaches 70% of
7 class members is one that reaches a “high percentage” and is within the “norm.” Barbara J. Rothstein
8 & Thomas E. Willging, Federal Judicial Center, “Managing Class Action Litigation: A Pocket Guide
9 or Judges,” at 27 (3d Ed. 2010).
10 CONCLUSION
11 60. The Notice Plan outlined above includes a comprehensive, state-of-the-art media
12 campaign that is designed to independently deliver an approximate 75.30% reach. The Notice Plan
13 also provides for the implementation of a dedicated Settlement Website and toll-free hotline to further
14 inform Settlement Class Members of their rights and options in the Settlement.
15 61. In my professional opinion, the Notice Plan described herein will provide full and
16 proper notice to Settlement Class Members and is the best practicable notice under the circumstances,
17 fulfilling all due process requirements, fully comporting with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, and the Northern
18 District’s Procedural Guidance for Class Action Settlements.
19 62. After the Notice Plan has concluded, Angeion will provide a final report verifying its
20 effective implementation to this Court.
21 I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
22 Dated: August 29, 2024
____________________
23 STEVEN WEISBROT
24
25
26
27
28
15
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 17 of 59
Exhibit A
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 18 of 59
1
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 19 of 59
IN RE: NOVARTIS AND PAR ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Case No. 1:18-cv-04361-AKH-SDA (S.D.N.Y.)
The Honorable Stewart D. Aaron, United States Magistrate Judge, Southern District of New York (July
26, 2024): The Court finds that the claims process administered by Angeion has integrity and
has been carried out in a diligent and thorough manner…Based upon the Court’s review of the
record, the Court finds that Angeion has taken prudent and necessary steps to address the
fraudulent claims submitted in this case… Angeion’s fraud detection system is robust and
appropriately designed to weed out fraudulent claims.
IN RE: FACEBOOK, INC. CONSUMER PRIVACY USER PROFILE LITIGATION
Case No. 3:18-md-02843 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Vincent Chhabria (March 29, 2023): The Court approves the Settlement
Administration Protocol & Notice Plan, amended Summary Notice (Dkt. No. 1114-8), second
amended Class Notice (Dkt. No. 1114-6), In-App Notice, amended Claim Form (Dkt. No. 1114-2), Opt-
Out Form (Dkt. No. 1122-1), and Objection Form (Dkt. No. 1122-2) and finds that their dissemination
substantially in the manner and form set forth in the Settlement Agreement and the subsequent
filings referenced above meets the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and due
process, constitutes the best notice practicable under the circumstances, and is reasonably
calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise members of the Settlement Class of the pendency
of the Action, the effect of the proposed Settlement (including the releases contained therein), the
anticipated motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses Award and for Service Awards, and their rights
to participate in, opt out of, or object to any aspect of the proposed Settlement.
IN RE: KIA HYUNDAI VEHICLE THEFT MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS
LIABILITY LITIGATION
Case No. 8:22-ml-03052 (C.D. Cal.)
The Honorable James V. Selna (October 31, 2023): The Court has considered the form and content
of the Class notice program and finds that the Class notice program and methodology as described
in the Settlement Agreement (a) meet the requirements of due process and Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 23(c) and (e); (b) constitute the best notice practicable under the circumstances to all
persons entitled to notice; and (c) satisfies the constitutional requirements regarding notice.
IN RE: PHILLIPS RECALLED CPAP, BI-LEVEL PAP, AND MECHANICAL VENTILATOR
PRODUCTS LITIGATION
Case No. 2:21-mc-01230 (MDL No. 3014) (W.D. Pa.)
The Honorable Joy Flowers Conti (October 10, 2023): The Court finds that the method of giving notice
to the Settlement Class ("Notice Plan")…(a) constitute the best notice practicable under the
circumstances, (b) are reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise the Settlement
Class Members of the pendency of the Action, the terms and benefits of the proposed
Settlement…(c) are reasonable and constitute due, adequate, and sufficient notice to all Settlement
Class Members and any other persons entitled to receive notice, (d) meet all applicable
requirements of law, including, but not limited to, 28 U.S.C. § 1715, Rule 23(c), the Due Process
Clause(s) of the United States Constitution, and any other applicable laws…
2
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 20 of 59
IN RE: AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Case No. 2:18-mn-02873 (D.S.C.)
The Honorable Richard Mark Gergel (August 29, 2023): The Court also approves the proposed Notice
Plan set forth in Exhibit C to the Settlement Agreement. The Court finds that the proposal for (i)
direct mailing of the Notice, as well as emailing of the Summary Notice, to each known Class
Member, (ii) personalized outreach to national and local water organizations, (iii) national
publication of the Summary Notice and a media campaign targeting all Active Public Water Systems
that may potentially meet the qualifications to become Class Members, and (iv) a website that
potential Class Members will be directed to displaying a long-form Notice that sets forth the details
of the proposed Settlement and provides a toll-free hotline, meets the requirements of Rule 23 and
due process and shall constitute due and sufficient notice to all Persons potentially entitled to
participate in the proposed Settlement. The proposed Notice Plan is the best practicable notice
under the circumstances of this case; is reasonably calculated under the circumstances to apprise
potential Class Members of the Settlement Agreement and of their right to object to or exclude
themselves from the proposed Settlement Class; is reasonable and constitutes due, adequate, and
sufficient notice to all Persons entitled to receive it; and meets all applicable requirements of Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 23, the United States Constitution, and other applicable laws and rules.
KUKORINIS V. WALMART, INC.
Case No. 8:22-cv-02402 (M.D. Fla.)
The Honorable Virginia M. Hernandez Covington (January 19, 2024): The Notice Plan, including the
form of the notices and methods for notifying the Settlement Class of the Settlement and its terms
and conditions…a. meet the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (including Rule 23
(c)-(e)), the United States Constitution (including the Due Process Clause), and the Rules of this Court;
b. constitute the best notice to Settlement Class Members practicable under the circumstances…
LE ET AL. V. ZUFFA, LLC
Case No. 2:15-cv-01045 (D. Nev.)
The Honorable Richard F. Boulware, II (November 17, 2023): The proposed Notice Plan, including
the proposed forms and manner of notice, constitutes the best notice practicable under the
circumstances and satisfies the requirements of due process and Rules 23(c)(2) and 23(e)(1) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
AMANS V. TESLA, INC.
Case No. 3:21-cv-03577 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Vince Chhabria (October 20, 2023): The Court further finds that the Notice is the best
notice practicable under the circumstances, and that the Notice complies fully with the
requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court also finds that the Notice constitutes
valid, due, and sufficient notice to all persons entitled thereto, and meets the requirements of Due
Process. The Court further finds that the Notice is reasonably calculated, under all circumstances,
to apprise members of the Settlement Class of the pendency of this case, the terms of the
Settlement Agreement, the right to object to the Settlement, and the right to exclude themselves
from the Settlement Class.
3
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 21 of 59
LUNDY V. META PLATFORMS, INC.
Case No. 3:18-cv-06793 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable James Donato (April 26, 2023): For purposes of Rule 23(e), the Notice Plan submitted
with the Motion for Preliminary Approval and the forms of notice attached thereto are
approved…The form, content, and method of giving notice to the Settlement Class as described in
the Notice Plan submitted with the Motion for Preliminary Approval are accepted at this time as
practicable and reasonable in light of the rather unique circumstances of this case.
IN RE: APPLE INC. DEVICE PERFORMANCE LITIGATION
Case No. 5:18-md-02827 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Edward J. Davila (March 17, 2021): Angeion undertook a comprehensive notice
campaign…The notice program was well executed, far-reaching, and exceeded both Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 23(c)(2)(B)’s requirement to provide the “best notice that is practicable under the
circumstances” and Rule 23(e)(1)(B)’s requirement to provide “direct notice in a reasonable manner.”
IN RE: TIKTOK, INC., CONSUMER PRIVACY LITIGATION
Case No. 1:20-cv-04699 (N.D. Ill.)
The Honorable John Z. Lee (August 22, 2022): The Class Notice was disseminated in accordance with
the procedures required by the Court’s Order Granting Preliminary Approval…in accordance with
applicable law, satisfied the requirements of Rule 23(e) and due process, and constituted the best
notice practicable…
IN RE: GOOGLE PLUS PROFILE LITIGATION
Case No. 5:18-cv-06164 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Edward J. Davila (January 25, 2021): The Court further finds that the program for
disseminating notice to Settlement Class Members provided for in the Settlement, and previously
approved and directed by the Court (hereinafter, the “Notice Program”), has been implemented by
the Settlement Administrator and the Parties, and such Notice Program, including the approved
forms of notice, is reasonable and appropriate and satisfies all applicable due process and other
requirements, and constitutes best notice reasonably calculated under the circumstances to
apprise Settlement Class Members…
MEHTA V. ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL LLC
Case No. 5:21-cv-01013 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Susan van Keulen (August 29, 2022): The proposed notice plan, which includes direct
notice via email, will provide the best notice practicable under the circumstances. This plan and the
Notice are reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise Class Members of the nature
and pendency of the Litigation, the scope of the Settlement Class, a summary of the class claims,
that a Class Member may enter an appearance through an attorney, that the Court will grant timely
exclusion requests, the time and manner for requesting exclusion, the binding effect of final
approval of the proposed Settlement, and the anticipated motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and
expenses and for service awards. The plan and the Notice constitute due, adequate, and sufficient
notice to Class Members and satisfy the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, due process, and all other applicable laws and rules.
4
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 22 of 59
ADTRADER, INC. V. GOOGLE LLC
Case No. 5:17-cv-07082 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Beth L. Freeman (May 13, 2022): The Court approves, as to form, content, and
distribution, the Notice Plan set forth in the Settlement Agreement, including the Notice Forms
attached to the Weisbrot Declaration, subject to the Court’s one requested change as further
described in Paragraph 8 of this Order, and finds that such Notice is the best notice practicable
under the circumstances, and that the Notice complies fully with the requirements of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court further finds that the Notice is reasonably calculated to, under
all circumstances, reasonably apprise members of the AdWords Class of the pendency of this Action,
the terms of the Settlement Agreement, and the right to object to the Settlement and to exclude
themselves from the AdWords Class. The Court also finds that the Notice constitutes valid, due and
sufficient notice to all persons entitled thereto, and meets the requirements of Due Process. The
Court further finds that the Notice Plan fully complies with the Northern District of California’s
Procedural Guidance for Class Action Settlements.
IN RE: FACEBOOK INTERNET TRACKING LITIGATION
Case No. 5:12-md-02314 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Edward J. Davila (November 10, 2022): The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ notice meets
all applicable requirements of due process and is particularly impressed with Plaintiffs’
methodology and use of technology to reach as many Class Members as possible. Based upon the
foregoing, the Court finds that the Settlement Class has been provided adequate notice.
CITY OF LONG BEACH V. MONSANTO COMPANY
Case No. 2:16-cv-03493 (C.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Fernando M. Olguin (March 14, 2022): The court approves the form, substance, and
requirements of the class Notice, (Dkt.278-2, Settlement Agreement, Exh. I). The proposed manner
of notice of the settlement set forth in the Settlement Agreement constitutes the best notice
practicable under the circumstances and complies with the requirements of due process.
STEWART V. LEXISNEXIS RISK DATA RETRIEVAL SERVICES, LLC
Case No. 3:20-cv-00903 (E.D. Va.)
The Honorable John A. Gibney Jr. (February 25, 2022): The proposed forms and methods for
notifying the proposed Settlement Class Members of the Settlement and its terms and conditions
meet the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B) and due process, constitute the best notice
practicable under the circumstances, and shall constitute due and sufficient notice to all persons
and entities entitled to notice…Based on the foregoing, the Court hereby approves the notice plans
developed by the Parties and the Settlement Administrator and directs that they be implemented
according to the Agreement and the notice plans attached as exhibits.
WILLIAMS V. APPLE INC.
Case No. 3:19-cv-04700 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Laurel Beeler (February 24, 2022): The Court finds the Email Notice and Website
Notice (attached to the Agreement as Exhibits 1 and 4, respectively), and their manner of
transmission, implemented pursuant to the Agreement (a) are the best practicable notice, (b) are
reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise the Subscriber Class of the pendency of
5
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 23 of 59
the Action and of their right to object to or to exclude themselves from the proposed settlement, (c)
are reasonable and constitute due, adequate and sufficient notice to all persons entitled to receive
notice, and (d) meet all requirements of applicable law.
CLEVELAND V. WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION
Case No. 0:20-cv-01906 (D. Minn.)
The Honorable Wilhelmina M. Wright (December 16, 2021): It appears to the Court that the
proposed Notice Plan described herein, and detailed in the Settlement Agreement, comports with
due process, Rule 23, and all other applicable law. Class Notice consists of email notice and postcard
notice when email addresses are unavailable, which is the best practicable notice under the
circumstances…The proposed Notice Plan complies with the requirements of Rule 23, Fed. R. Civ.
P., and due process, and Class Notice is to be sent to the Settlement Class Members as set forth in
the Settlement Agreement and pursuant to the deadlines above.
RASMUSSEN V. TESLA, INC. D/B/A TESLA MOTORS, INC.
Case No. 5:19-cv-04596 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Beth Labson Freeman (December 10, 2021): The Court has carefully considered the
forms and methods of notice to the Settlement Class set forth in the Settlement Agreement (“Notice
Plan”). The Court finds that the Notice Plan constitutes the best notice practicable under the
circumstances and fully satisfies the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
the requirements of due process, and the requirements of any other applicable law, such that the
terms of the Settlement Agreement, the releases provided for therein, and this Court’s final
judgment will be binding on all Settlement Class Members.
CAMERON V. APPLE INC.
Case No. 4:19-cv-03074 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers (November 16, 2021): The parties’ proposed notice plan
appears to be constitutionally sound in that plaintiffs have made a sufficient showing that it is: (i)
the best notice practicable; (ii) reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise the Class
members of the proposed settlement and of their right to object or to exclude themselves as
provided in the settlement agreement; (iii) reasonable and constitute due, adequate, and sufficient
notice to all persons entitled to receive notice; and (iv) meet all applicable requirements of due
process and any other applicable requirements under federal law.
RISTO V. SCREEN ACTORS GUILD - AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TELEVISION AND
RADIO ARTISTS ET AL.
Case No. 2:18-cv-07241 (C.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Christina A. Snyder (November 12, 2021): The Court approves the publication notice
plan presented to this Court as it will provide notice to potential class members through a
combination of traditional and digital media that will consist of publication of notice via press
release, programmatic display digital advertising, and targeted social media, all of which will direct
Class Members to the Settlement website…The notice plan satisfies any due process concerns as
this Court certified the class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(1)…
6
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 24 of 59
JENKINS V. NATIONAL GRID USA SERVICE COMPANY, INC.
Case No. 2:15-cv-01219 (E.D.N.Y.)
The Honorable Joanna Seybert (November 8, 2021): Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(1) and
23(c)(2)(B), the Court approves the proposed Notice Plan and procedures set forth at Section 8 of
the Settlement, including the form and content of the proposed forms of notice to the Settlement
Class attached as Exhibits C-G to the Settlement and the proposed procedures for Settlement Class
Members to exclude themselves from the Settlement Class or object. The Court finds that the
proposed Notice Plan meets the requirements of due process under the United States Constitution
and Rule 23, and that such Notice Plan—which includes direct notice to Settlement Class Members
sent via first class U.S. Mail and email; the establishment of a Settlement Website (at the URL,
www.nationalgridtcpasettlement.com) where Settlement Class Members can view the full
settlement agreement, the detailed long-form notice (in English and Spanish), and other key case
documents; publication notice in forms attached as Exhibits E and F to the Settlement sent via social
media (Facebook and Instagram) and streaming radio (e.g., Pandora and iHeart Radio). The Notice
Plan shall also include a paid search campaign on search engine(s) chosen by Angeion (e.g., Google)
in the form attached as Exhibits G and the establishment of a toll-free telephone number where
Settlement Class Members can get additional information—is the best notice practicable under the
circumstances and shall constitute due and sufficient notice to all persons entitled thereto.
NELLIS V. VIVID SEATS, LLC
Case No. 1:20-cv-02486 (N.D. Ill.)
The Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr. (November 1, 2021): The Notice Program, together with all
included and ancillary documents thereto, (a) constituted reasonable notice; (b) constituted notice
that was reasonably calculated under the circumstances to apprise members of the Settlement
Class of the pendency of the Litigation…(c) constituted reasonable, due, adequate and sufficient
notice to all Persons entitled to receive notice; and (d) met all applicable requirements of due
process and any other applicable law. The Court finds that Settlement Class Members have been
provided the best notice practicable of the Settlement and that such notice fully satisfies all
requirements of law as well as all requirements of due process.
PELLETIER V. ENDO INTERNATIONAL PLC
Case No. 2:17-cv-05114 (E.D. Pa.)
The Honorable Michael M. Baylson (October 25, 2021): The Court approves, as to form and content,
the Notice of Pendency and Proposed Settlement of Class Action (the “Notice”), the Proof of Claim
and Release form (the “Proof of Claim”), and the Summary Notice, annexed hereto as Exhibits A-1,
A-2, and A-3, respectively, and finds that the mailing and distribution of the Notice and publishing
of the Summary Notice, substantially in the manner and form set forth in ¶¶7-10 of this Order, meet
the requirements of Rule 23 and due process, and is the best notice practicable under the
circumstances and shall constitute due and sufficient notice to all Persons entitled thereto.
BIEGEL V. BLUE DIAMOND GROWERS
Case No. 7:20-cv-03032 (S.D.N.Y.)
The Honorable Cathy Seibel (October 25, 2021): The Court finds that the Notice Plan, set forth in
the Settlement Agreement and effectuated pursuant to the Preliminary Approval Order: (i) was the
best notice practicable under the circumstances; (ii) was reasonably calculated to provide, and did
provide, due and sufficient notice to the Settlement Class regarding the existence and nature of the
7
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 25 of 59
Action…and (iii) satisfied the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the United States
Constitution, and all other applicable law.
QUINTERO V. SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
Case No. 37-2019-00017834-CU-NP-CTL (Cal. Super. Ct.)
The Honorable Eddie C. Sturgeon (September 27, 2021): The Court has reviewed the class notices
for the Settlement Class and the methods for providing notice and has determined that the parties
will employ forms and methods of notice that constitute the best notice practicable under the
circumstances; are reasonably calculated to apprise class members of the terms of the Settlement
and of their right to participate in it, object, or opt-out; are reasonable and constitute due, adequate,
and sufficient notice to all persons entitled to receive notice; and meet all constitutional and
statutory requirements, including all due process requirements and the California Rules of Court.
HOLVE V. MCCORMICK & COMPANY, INC.
Case No. 6:16-cv-06702 (W.D.N.Y.)
The Honorable Mark W. Pedersen (September 23, 2021): The Court finds that the form, content and
method of giving notice to the Class as described in the Settlement Agreement and the Declaration
of the Settlement Administrator: (a) will constitute the best practicable notice; (b) are reasonably
calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise the Settlement Class Members of the pendency of
the Action…(c) are reasonable and constitute due, adequate, and sufficient notice to all Settlement
Class Members and other persons entitled to receive notice; and (d) meet all applicable
requirements of law, including but not limited to 28 U.S.C. § 1715, Rule 23(c) and (e), and the Due
Process Clause(s) of the United States Constitution.
CULBERTSON ET AL. V. DELOITTE CONSULTING LLP
Case No. 1:20-cv-03962 (S.D.N.Y.)
The Honorable Lewis J. Liman (August 27, 2021): The notice procedures described in the Notice Plan
are hereby found to be the best means of providing notice under the circumstances and, when
completed, shall constitute due and sufficient notice of the proposed Settlement Agreement and
the Final Approval Hearing to all persons affected by and/or entitled to participate in the Settlement
Agreement, in full compliance with the notice requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure and due process of law.
PULMONARY ASSOCIATES OF CHARLESTON PLLC V. GREENWAY HEALTH, LLC
Case No. 3:19-cv-00167 (N.D. Ga.)
The Honorable Timothy C. Batten, Sr. (August 24, 2021): Under Rule 23(c)(2), the Court finds that
the content, format, and method of disseminating Notice, as set forth in the Motion, the Declaration
of Steven Weisbrot filed on July 2, 2021, and the Settlement Agreement and Release, including notice
by First Class U.S. Mail and email to all known Class Members, is the best notice practicable under
the circumstances and satisfies all requirements provided in Rule 23(c)(2)(B) and due process.
IN RE: BROILER CHICKEN GROWER ANTITRUST LITIGATION (NO II)
Case No. 6:20-md-02977 (E.D. Okla.)
The Honorable Robert J. Shelby (August 23, 2021): The Court approves the method of notice to be
provided to the Settlement Class as set forth in Plaintiffs’ Motion and Memorandum of Law in
8
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 26 of 59
Support of Motion for Approval of the Form and Manner of Class Notice and Appointment of
Settlement Administrator and Request for Expedited Treatment and the Declaration of Steven
Weisbrot on Angeion Group Qualifications and Proposed Notice Plan…The Court finds and
concludes that such notice: (a) is the best notice that is practicable under the circumstances, and is
reasonably calculated to reach the members of the Settlement Class and to apprise them of the
Action, the terms and conditions of the Settlement, their right to opt out and be excluded from the
Settlement Class, and to object to the Settlement; and (b) meets the requirements of Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 23 and due process.
ROBERTS ET AL. V. AT&T MOBILITY, LLC
Case No. 3:15-cv-03418 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Edward M. Chen (August 20, 2021): The Court finds that such Notice program,
including the approved forms of notice: (a) constituted the best notice that is practicable under the
circumstances; (b) included direct individual notice to all Settlement Class Members who could be
identified through reasonable effort, as well as supplemental notice via a social media notice
campaign and reminder email and SMS notices; (c) constituted notice that was reasonably
calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise Settlement Class Members of the nature of this
Action …(d) constituted due, adequate and sufficient notice to all persons entitled to notice; and (e)
met all applicable requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, Due Process under the U.S.
Constitution, and any other applicable law.
PYGIN V. BOMBAS, LLC
Case No. 4:20-cv-04412 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Jeffrey S. White (July 12, 2021): The Court also concludes that the Class Notice and
Notice Program set forth in the Settlement Agreement satisfy the requirements of due process and
Rule 23 and provide the best notice practicable under the circumstances. The Class Notice and
Notice Program are reasonably calculated to apprise Settlement Class Members of the nature of
this Litigation, the Scope of the Settlement Class, the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the right
of Settlement Class Members to object to the Settlement Agreement or exclude themselves from
the Settlement Class and the process for doing so, and of the Final Approval Hearing. Accordingly,
the Court approves the Class Notice and Notice Program and the Claim Form.
WILLIAMS ET AL. V. RECKITT BENCKISER LLC ET AL.
Case No. 1:20-cv-23564 (S.D. Fla.)
The Honorable Jonathan Goodman (April 23, 2021): The Court approves, as to form and content, the
Class Notice and Internet Notice submitted by the parties (Exhibits B and D to the Settlement
Agreement or Notices substantially similar thereto) and finds that the procedures described therein
meet the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and due process, and
provide the best notice practicable under the circumstances. The proposed Class Notice Plan --
consisting of (i) internet and social media notice; and (ii) notice via an established a Settlement
Website -- is reasonably calculated to reach no less than 80% of the Settlement Class Members.
NELSON ET AL. V. IDAHO CENTRAL CREDIT UNION
Case No. CV03-20-00831, CV03-20-03221 (Idaho Jud. Dist.)
The Honorable Robert C. Naftz (January 19, 2021): The Court finds that the Proposed Notice here
is tailored to this Class and designed to ensure broad and effective reach to it…The Parties represent
9
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 27 of 59
that the operative notice plan is the best notice practicable and is reasonably designed to reach the
settlement class members. The Court agrees.
IN RE: HANNA ANDERSSON AND SALESFORCE.COM DATA BREACH LITIGATION
Case No. 3:20-cv-00812 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Edward M. Chen (December 29, 2020): The Court finds that the Class Notice and
Notice Program satisfy the requirements of due process and Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure and provide the best notice practicable under the circumstances.
IN RE: PEANUT FARMERS ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Case No. 2:19-cv-00463 (E.D. Va.)
The Honorable Raymond A. Jackson (December 23, 2020): The Court finds that the Notice
Program…constitutes the best notice that is practicable under the circumstances and is valid, due
and sufficient notice to all persons entitled thereto and complies fully with the requirements of Rule
23(c)(2) and the due process requirements of the Constitution of the United States.
BENTLEY ET AL. V. LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., INC.
Case No. 2:19-cv-13554 (D.N.J.)
The Honorable Madeline Cox Arleo (December 18, 2020): The Court finds that notice of this
Settlement was given to Settlement Class Members in accordance with the Preliminary Approval
Order and constituted the best notice practicable of the proceedings and matters set forth therein,
including the Litigation, the Settlement, and the Settlement Class Members’ rights to object to the
Settlement or opt out of the Settlement Class, to all Persons entitled to such notice, and that this
notice satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and of due process.
IN RE: ALLURA FIBER CEMENT SIDING PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Case No. 2:19-mn-02886 (D.S.C.)
The Honorable David C. Norton (December 18, 2020): The proposed Notice provides the best notice
practicable under the circumstances. It allows Settlement Class Members a full and fair opportunity
to consider the proposed settlement. The proposed plan for distributing the Notice likewise is a
reasonable method calculated to reach all members of the Settlement Class who would be bound
by the settlement. There is no additional method of distribution that would be reasonably likely to
notify Settlement Class Members who may not receive notice pursuant to the proposed distribution
plan.
ADKINS ET AL. V. FACEBOOK, INC.
Case No. 3:18-cv-05982 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable William Alsup (November 15, 2020): Notice to the class is “reasonably calculated,
under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford
them an opportunity to present their objections.” Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Tr. Co., 399 U.S.
306, 314 (1650).
10
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 28 of 59
IN RE: 21ST CENTURY ONCOLOGY CUSTOMER DATA SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION
Case No. 8:16-md-02737 (M.D. Fla.)
The Honorable Mary S. Scriven (November 2, 2020): The Court finds and determines that mailing
the Summary Notice and publication of the Settlement Agreement, Long Form Notice, Summary
Notice, and Claim Form on the Settlement Website, all pursuant to this Order, constitute the best
notice practicable under the circumstances, constitute due and sufficient notice of the matters set
forth in the notices to all persons entitled to receive such notices, and fully satisfies the of due
process, Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C. § 1715, and all other applicable
laws and rules. The Court further finds that all of the notices are written in plain language and are
readily understandable by Class Members.
MARINO ET AL. V. COACH INC.
Case No. 1:16-cv-01122 (S.D.N.Y.)
The Honorable Valerie Caproni (August 24, 2020): The Court finds that the form, content, and
method of giving notice to the Settlement Class as described in paragraph 8 of this Order: (a) will
constitute the best practicable notice; (b) are reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to
apprise the Settlement Class Members of the pendency of the Action, the terms of the proposed
Settlement, and their rights under the proposed Settlement, including but not limited to their rights
to object to or exclude themselves from the proposed Settlement and other rights under the terms
of the Settlement Agreement; (c) are reasonable and constitute due, adequate, and sufficient notice
to all Settlement Class Members and other persons entitled to receive notice; and (d) meet all
applicable requirements of law, including but not limited to 28 U.S.C. § 1715, Rule 23(c) and (e), and
the Due Process Clause(s) of the United States Constitution. The Court further finds that all of the
notices are written in plain language, are readily understandable by Settlement Class Members, and
are materially consistent with the Federal Judicial Center’s illustrative class action notices.
BROWN V. DIRECTV, LLC
Case No. 2:13-cv-01170 (C.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Dolly M. Gee (July 23, 2020): Given the nature and size of the class, the fact that the
class has no geographical limitations, and the sheer number of calls at issue, the Court determines
that these methods constitute the best and most reasonable form of notice under the
circumstances.
IN RE: SSA BONDS ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Case No. 1:16-cv-03711 (S.D.N.Y.)
The Honorable Edgardo Ramos (July 15, 2020): The Court finds that the mailing and distribution of
the Notice and the publication of the Summary Notice substantially in the manner set forth below
meet the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and due process and
constitute the best notice practicable under the circumstances, and shall constitute due and
sufficient notice to all Persons entitled to notice.
KJESSLER ET AL. V. ZAAPPAAZ, INC. ET AL.
Case No. 4:18-cv-00430 (S.D. Tex.)
The Honorable Nancy F. Atlas (July 14, 2020): The Court also preliminarily approves the proposed
manner of communicating the Notice and Summary Notice to the putative Settlement Class, as set
11
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 29 of 59
out below, and finds it is the best notice practicable under the circumstances, constitutes due and
sufficient notice to all persons and entities entitled to receive such notice, and fully satisfies the
requirements of applicable laws, including due process and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.
HESTER ET AL. V. WALMART, INC.
Case No. 5:18-cv-05225 (W.D. Ark.)
The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks (July 9, 2020): The Court finds that the Notice and Notice Plan
substantially in the manner and form set forth in this Order and the Agreement meet the
requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and due process, is the best notice practicable
under the circumstances, and shall constitute due and sufficient notice to all Persons entitled
thereto.
CLAY ET AL. V. CYTOSPORT INC.
Case No. 3:15-cv-00165 (S.D. Cal.)
The Honorable M. James Lorenz (June 17, 2020): The Court approves the proposed Notice Plan for
giving notice to the Settlement Class through publication, both print and digital, and through the
establishment of a Settlement Website, as more fully described in the Agreement and the Claims
Administrator’s affidavits (docs. no. 222-9, 224, 224-1, and 232-3 through 232-6). The Notice Plan, in
form, method, and content, complies with the requirements of Rule 23 and due process, and
constitutes the best notice practicable under the circumstances.
GROGAN V. AARON’S INC.
Case No. 1:18-cv-02821 (N.D. Ga.)
The Honorable J.P. Boulee (May 1, 2020): The Court finds that the Notice Plan as set forth in the
Settlement Agreement meets the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 and constitutes the best notice
practicable under the circumstances, including direct individual notice by mail and email to
Settlement Class Members where feasible and a nationwide publication website-based notice
program, as well as establishing a Settlement Website at the web address of
www.AaronsTCPASettlement.com, and satisfies fully the requirements the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, the U.S. Constitution, and any other applicable law, such that the Settlement Agreement
and Final Order and Judgment will be binding on all Settlement Class Members.
CUMMINGS V. BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO ET AL.
Case No. D-202-CV-2001-00579 (N.M. Jud. Dist.)
The Honorable Carl Butkus (March 30, 2020): The Court has reviewed the Class Notice, the Plan of
Allocation and Distribution and Claim Form, each of which it approves in form and substance. The
Court finds that the form and methods of notice set forth in the Agreement: (i) are reasonable and
the best practicable notice under the circumstances; (ii) are reasonably calculated to apprise
Settlement Class Members of the pendency of the Lawsuit, of their rights to object to or opt-out of
the Settlement, and of the Final Approval Hearing; (iii) constitute due, adequate, and sufficient notice
to all persons entitled to receive notice; and (iv) meet the requirements of the New Mexico Rules of
Civil Procedure, the requirements of due process under the New Mexico and United States
Constitutions, and the requirements of any other applicable rules or laws.
12
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 30 of 59
SCHNEIDER ET AL. V. CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL, INC.
Case No. 4:16-cv-02200 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. (January 31, 2020): Given that direct notice appears to be
infeasible, the third-party settlement administrator will implement a digital media campaign and
provide for publication notice in People magazine, a nationwide publication, and the East Bay Times.
SA § IV.A, C; Dkt. No. 205-12 at ¶¶ 13–23. The publication notices will run for four consecutive weeks.
Dkt. No. 205 at ¶ 23. The digital media campaign includes an internet banner notice implemented
using a 60-day desktop and mobile campaign. Dkt. No. 205-12 at ¶ 18. It will rely on “Programmatic
Display Advertising” to reach the “Target Audience,” Dkt. No. 216-1 at ¶ 6, which is estimated to
include 30,100,000 people and identified using the target definition of “Fast Food & Drive-In
Restaurants Total Restaurants Last 6 Months [Chipotle Mexican Grill],” Dkt. No. 205-12 at ¶ 13.
Programmatic display advertising utilizes “search targeting,” “category contextual targeting,”
“keyword contextual targeting,” and “site targeting,” to place ads. Dkt. No. 216-1 at ¶¶ 9–12. And
through “learning” technology, it continues placing ads on websites where the ad is performing well.
Id. ¶ 7. Put simply, prospective Class Members will see a banner ad notifying them of the settlement
when they search for terms or websites that are similar to or related to Chipotle, when they browse
websites that are categorically relevant to Chipotle (for example, a website related to fast casual
dining or Mexican food), and when they browse websites that include a relevant keyword (for
example, a fitness website with ads comparing fast casual choices). Id. ¶¶ 9–12. By using this
technology, the banner notice is “designed to result in serving approximately 59,598,000
impressions.” Dkt. No. 205-12 at ¶ 18.
The Court finds that the proposed notice process is “‘reasonably calculated, under all the
circumstances,’ to apprise all class members of the proposed settlement.” Roes, 944 F.3d at 1045
(citation omitted).
HANLEY V. TAMPA BAY SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT LLC
Case No. 8:19-cv-00550 (M.D. Fla.)
The Honorable Charlene Edwards Honeywell (January 7, 2020): The Court approves the form and
content of the Class notices and claim forms substantially in the forms attached as Exhibits A-D to
the Settlement. The Court further finds that the Class Notice program described in the Settlement
is the best practicable under the circumstances. The Class Notice program is reasonably calculated
under the circumstances to inform the Settlement Class of the pendency of the Action, certification
of a Settlement Class, the terms of the Settlement, Class Counsel’s attorney’s fees application and
the request for a service award for Plaintiff, and their rights to opt-out of the Settlement Class or
object to the Settlement. The Class notices and Class Notice program constitute sufficient notice to
all persons entitled to notice. The Class notices and Class Notice program satisfy all applicable
requirements of law, including, but not limited to, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and the
Constitutional requirement of Due Process.
CORCORAN ET AL. V. CVS HEALTH ET AL.
Case No. 4:15-cv-03504 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers (November 22, 2019): Having reviewed the parties’
briefings, plaintiffs’ declarations regarding the selection process for a notice provider in this matter
and regarding Angeion Group LLC’s experience and qualifications, and in light of defendants’ non-
13
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 31 of 59
opposition, the Court APPROVES Angeion Group LLC as the notice provider. Thus, the Court GRANTS
the motion for approval of class notice provider and class notice program on this basis.
Having considered the parties’ revised proposed notice program, the Court agrees that the parties’
proposed notice program is the “best notice that is practicable under the circumstances.” The Court
is satisfied with the representations made regarding Angeion Group LLC’s methods for ascertaining
email addresses from existing information in the possession of defendants. Rule 23 further
contemplates and permits electronic notice to class members in certain situations. See Fed. R. Civ.
P. 23(c)(2)(B). The Court finds, in light of the representations made by the parties, that this is a
situation that permits electronic notification via email, in addition to notice via United States Postal
Service. Thus, the Court APPROVES the parties’ revised proposed class notice program, and GRANTS
the motion for approval of class notice provider and class notice program as to notification via email
and United States Postal Service mail.
PATORA V. TARTE, INC.
Case No. 7:18-cv-11760 (S.D.N.Y.)
The Honorable Kenneth M. Karas (October 2, 2019): The Court finds that the form, content, and
method of giving notice to the Class as described in Paragraph 9 of this Order: (a) will constitute the
best practicable notice; (b) are reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise the
Settlement Class Members of the pendency of the Action, the terms of the Proposed Settlement,
and their rights under the Proposed Settlement, including but not limited to their rights to object to
or exclude themselves from the Proposed Settlement and other rights under the terms of the
Settlement Agreement; (c) are reasonable and constitute due, adequate, and sufficient notice to all
Settlement Class Members and other persons entitled to receive notice; and (d) meet all applicable
requirements of law, including but not limited to 28 U.S.C. § 1715, Rule 23(c) and (e), and the Due
Process Clauses of the United States Constitution. The Court further finds that all of the notices are
written in simple terminology, are readily understandable by Settlement Class Members, and are
materially consistent with the Federal Judicial Center's illustrative class action notices.
CARTER ET AL. V. GENERAL NUTRITION CENTERS, INC., AND GNC HOLDINGS, INC.
Case No. 2:16-cv-00633 (W.D. Pa.)
The Honorable Mark R. Hornak (September 9, 2019): The Court finds that the Class Notice and the
manner of its dissemination described in Paragraph 7 above and Section VII of the Agreement
constitutes the best practicable notice under the circumstances and is reasonably calculated, under
all the circumstances, to apprise proposed Settlement Class Members of the pendency of this
action, the terms of the Agreement, and their right to object to or exclude themselves from the
proposed Settlement Class. The Court finds that the notice is reasonable, that it constitutes due,
adequate and sufficient notice to all persons entitled to receive notice, and that it meets the
requirements of due process, Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Ci vii Procedure, and any other
applicable laws.
CORZINE V. MAYTAG CORPORATION ET AL.
Case No. 5:15-cv-05764 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Beth L. Freeman (August 21, 2019): The Court, having reviewed the proposed
Summary Notice, the proposed FAQ, the proposed Publication Notice, the proposed Claim Form,
and the proposed plan for distributing and disseminating each of them, finds and concludes that
14
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 32 of 59
the proposed plan will provide the best notice practicable under the circumstances and satisfies all
requirements of federal and state laws and due process.
MEDNICK V. PRECOR, INC.
Case No. 1:14-cv-03624 (N.D. Ill.)
The Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber (June 12, 2019): Notice provided to Class Members pursuant
to the Preliminary Class Settlement Approval Order constitutes the best notice practicable under
the circumstances, including individual email and mail notice to all Class Members who could be
identified through reasonable effort, including information provided by authorized third-party
retailers of Precor. Said notice provided full and adequate notice of these proceedings and of the
matter set forth therein, including the proposed Settlement set forth in the Agreement, to all
persons entitled to such notice, and said notice fully satisfied the requirements of F.R.C.P. Rule 23
(e) and (h) and the requirements of due process under the United States and California
Constitutions.
GONZALEZ V. TCR SPORTS BROADCASTING HOLDING LLP ET AL.
Case No. 1:18-cv-20048 (S.D. Fla.)
The Honorable Darrin P. Gayles (May 24, 2019): The Court finds that notice to the class was
reasonable and the best notice practicable under the circumstances, consistent with Rule 23(e)(1)
and Rule 23(c)(2)(B).
ANDREWS ET AL. V. THE GAP, INC. ET AL.
Case No. CGC-18-567237 (Cal. Super. Ct.)
The Honorable Richard B. Ulmer Jr. (May 10, 2019): The Court finds that (a) the Full Notice, Email
Notice, and Publication constitute the best notice practicable under the circumstances, (b) they
constitute valid, due, and sufficient notice to all members of the Class, and (c) they comply fully with
the requirements of California Code of Civil Procedure section 382, California Rules of Court 3.766
and 3.769, the California and United States Constitutions, and other applicable law.
COLE ET AL. V. NIBCO, INC.
Case No. 3:13-cv-07871 (D.N.J.)
The Honorable Freda L. Wolfson (April 11, 2019): The record shows, and the Court finds, that the
Notice Plan has been implemented in the manner approved by the Court in its Preliminary Approval
Order. The Court finds that the Notice Plan constitutes: (i) the best notice practicable to the
Settlement Class under the circumstances; (ii) was reasonably calculated, under the circumstances,
to apprise the Settlement Class of the pendency of this…, (iii) due, adequate, and sufficient notice to
all Persons entitled to receive notice; and (iv) notice that fully satisfies the requirements of the
United States Constitution (including the Due Process Clause), Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, and any other
applicable law.
DIFRANCESCO ET AL. V. UTZ QUALITY FOODS, INC.
Case No. 1:14-cv-14744 (D. Mass.)
The Honorable Douglas P. Woodlock (March 15, 2019): The Court finds that the Notice plan and all
forms of Notice to the Class as set forth in the Settlement Agreement and Exhibits 2 and 6 thereto,
as amended (the "Notice Program"), is reasonably calculated to, under all circumstances, apprise
15
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 33 of 59
the members of the Settlement Class of the pendency of this action, the certification of the
Settlement Class, the terms of the Settlement Agreement, and the right of members to object to the
settlement or to exclude themselves from the Class. The Notice Program is consistent with the
requirements of Rule 23 and due process, and constitutes the best notice practicable under the
circumstances.
IN RE: CHRYSLER-DODGE-JEEP ECODIESEL MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Case No. 3:17-md-02777 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Edward M. Chen (February 11, 2019): Also, the parties went through a sufficiently
rigorous selection process to select a settlement administrator. See Proc. Guidance for Class Action
Sett. ¶ 2; see also Cabraser Decl. ¶¶ 9-10. While the settlement administration costs are significant
– an estimated $1.5 million – they are adequately justified given the size of the class and the relief
being provided.
In addition, the Court finds that the language of the class notices (short and long-form) is
appropriate and that the means of notice – which includes mail notice, electronic notice, publication
notice, and social media “marketing” – is the “best notice…practicable under the circumstances.”
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B); see also Proc. Guidance for Class Action Sett. ¶¶ 3-5, 9 (addressing class
notice, opt-outs, and objections). The Court notes that the means of notice has changed somewhat,
as explained in the Supplemental Weisbrot Declaration filed on February 8, 2019, so that notice will
be more targeted and effective. See generally Docket No. 525 (Supp. Weisbrot Decl.) (addressing,
inter alia, press release to be distributed via national newswire service, digital and social media
marketing designed to enhance notice, and “reminder” first-class mail notice when AEM becomes
available).
Finally, the parties have noted that the proposed settlement bears similarity to the settlement in
the Volkswagen MDL. See Proc. Guidance for Class Action Sett. ¶ 11.
RYSEWYK ET AL. V. SEARS HOLDINGS CORPORATION ET AL.
Case No. 1:15-cv-04519 (N.D. Ill.)
The Honorable Manish S. Shah (January 29, 2019): The Court holds that the Notice and notice plan
as carried out satisfy the requirements of Rule 23(e) and due process. This Court has previously held
the Notice and notice plan to be reasonable and the best practicable under the circumstances in its
Preliminary Approval Order dated August 6, 2018. (Dkt. 191) Based on the declaration of Steven
Weisbrot, Esq. of Angeion Group (Dkt. No. 209-2), which sets forth compliance with the Notice Plan
and related matters, the Court finds that the multi-pronged notice strategy as implemented has
successfully reached the putative Settlement Class, thus constituting the best practicable notice and
satisfying due process.
MAYHEW ET AL. V. KAS DIRECT, LLC, AND S.C. JOHNSON & SON, INC.
Case No. 7:16-cv-06981 (S.D.N.Y.)
The Honorable Vincent J. Briccetti (June 26, 2018): In connection with their motion, plaintiffs provide
the declaration of Steven Weisbrot, Esq., a principal at the firm Angeion Group, LLC, which will serve
as the notice and settlement administrator in this case. (Doc. #101, Ex. F: Weisbrot Decl.) According
to Mr. Weisbrot, he has been responsible for the design and implementation of hundreds of class
16
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 34 of 59
action administration plans, has taught courses on class action claims administration, and has given
testimony to the Judicial Conference Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure on the role of
direct mail, email, and digital media in due process notice. Mr. Weisbrot states that the internet
banner advertisement campaign will be responsive to search terms relevant to “baby wipes, baby
products, baby care products, detergents, sanitizers, baby lotion, [and] diapers,” and will target
users who are currently browsing or recently browsed categories “such as parenting, toddlers, baby
care, [and] organic products.” (Weisbrot Decl. ¶ 18). According to Mr. Weisbrot, the internet banner
advertising campaign will reach seventy percent of the proposed class members at least three times
each. (Id. ¶ 9). Accordingly, the Court approves of the manner of notice proposed by the parties as
it is reasonable and the best practicable option for confirming the class members receive notice.
IN RE: OUTER BANKS POWER OUTAGE LITIGATION
Case No. 4:17-cv-00141 (E.D.N.C.)
The Honorable James C. Dever III (May 2, 2018): The court has reviewed the proposed notice plan
and finds that the notice plan provides the best practicable notice under the circumstances and,
when completed, shall constitute fair, reasonable, and adequate notice of the settlement to all
persons and entities affected by or entitled to participate in the settlement, in full compliance with
the notice requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B) and due process. Thus, the court approves the
proposed notice plan.
GOLDEMBERG ET AL. V. JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC.
Case No. 7:13-cv-03073 (S.D.N.Y.)
The Honorable Nelson S. Roman (November 1, 2017): Notice of the pendency of the Action as a class
action and of the proposed Settlement, as set forth in the Settlement Notices, was given to all Class
Members who could be identified with reasonable effort, consistent with the terms of the
Preliminary Approval Order. The form and method of notifying the Class of the pendency of the
Action as a class action and of the terms and conditions of the proposed Settlement met the
requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, due process, and any other
applicable law in the United States. Such notice constituted the best notice practicable under the
circumstances, and constituted due and sufficient notice to all persons and entities entitled thereto.
HALVORSON V. TALENTBIN, INC.
Case No. 3:15-cv-05166 (N.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Joseph C. Spero (July 25, 2017): The Court finds that the Notice provided for in the
Order of Preliminary Approval of Settlement has been provided to the Settlement Class, and the
Notice provided to the Settlement Class constituted the best notice practicable under the
circumstances, and was in full compliance with the notice requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, due process, the United States Constitution, and any other applicable law.
The Notice apprised the members of the Settlement Class of the pendency of the litigation; of all
material elements of the proposed settlement, including but not limited to the relief afforded the
Settlement Class under the Settlement Agreement; of the res judicata effect on members of the
Settlement Class and of their opportunity to object to, comment on, or opt-out of, the Settlement;
of the identity of Settlement Class Counsel and of information necessary to contact Settlement Class
Counsel; and of the right to appear at the Fairness Hearing. Full opportunity has been afforded to
members of the Settlement Class to participate in the Fairness Hearing. Accordingly, the Court
17
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 35 of 59
determines that all Final Settlement Class Members are bound by this Final Judgment in accordance
with the terms provided herein.
IN RE: ASHLEY MADISON CUSTOMER DATA SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION
MDL No. 2669/Case No. 4:15-md-02669 (E.D. Mo.)
The Honorable John A. Ross (July 21, 2017): The Court further finds that the method of disseminating
Notice, as set forth in the Motion, the Declaration of Steven Weisbrot, Esq. on Adequacy of Notice
Program, dated July 13, 2017, and the Parties’ Stipulation—including an extensive and targeted
publication campaign composed of both consumer magazine publications in People and Sports
Illustrated, as well as serving 11,484,000 highly targeted digital banner ads to reach the prospective
class members that will deliver approximately 75.3% reach with an average frequency of 3.04 —is
the best method of notice practicable under the circumstances and satisfies all requirements
provided in Rule 23(c)(2)(B) and all Constitutional requirements including those of due process.
The Court further finds that the Notice fully satisfies Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
and the requirements of due process; provided, that the Parties, by agreement, may revise the
Notice, the Claim Form, and other exhibits to the Stipulation, in ways that are not material or ways
that are appropriate to update those documents for purposes of accuracy.
TRAXLER ET AL. V. PPG INDUSTRIES INC. ET AL.
Case No. 1:15-cv-00912 (N.D. Ohio)
The Honorable Dan Aaron Polster (April 27, 2017): The Court hereby approves the form and
procedure for disseminating notice of the proposed settlement to the Settlement Class as set forth
in the Agreement. The Court finds that the proposed Notice Plan contemplated constitutes the best
notice practicable under the circumstances and is reasonably calculated, under the circumstances,
to apprise Settlement Class Members of the pendency of the Action and their right to object to the
proposed settlement or opt out of the Settlement Class in full compliance with the requirements of
applicable law, including the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution and Rules 23(c)
and (e). In addition, Class Notice clearly and concisely states in plain, easily understood language: (i)
the nature of the action; (ii) the definition of the certified Settlement Class; (iii) the claims and issues
of the Settlement Class; (iv) that a Settlement Class Member may enter an appearance through an
attorney if the member so desires; (v) that the Court will exclude from the Settlement Class any
member who requests exclusion; (vi) the time and manner for requesting exclusion; and (vii) the
binding effect of a class judgment on members under Rule 23(c)(3).
IN RE: THE HOME DEPOT, INC., CUSTOMER DATA SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION
Case No. 1:14-md-02583 (N.D. Ga.)
The Honorable Thomas W. Thrash Jr. (March 10, 2017): The Court finds that the form, content, and
method of giving notice to the settlement class as described in the settlement agreement and
exhibits: (a) constitute the best practicable notice to the settlement class; (b) are reasonably
calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise settlement class members of the pendency of the
action, the terms of the proposed settlement, and their rights under the proposed settlement; (c)
are reasonable and constitute due, adequate, and sufficient notice to those persons entitled to
receive notice; and (d) satisfy the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, the
constitutional requirement of due process, and any other legal requirements. The Court further
18
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 36 of 59
finds that the notice is written in plain language, uses simple terminology, and is designed to be
readily understandable by settlement class members.
ROY V. TITEFLEX CORPORATION T/A GASTITE AND WARD MANUFACTURING, LLC
Case No. 384003V (Md. Cir. Ct.)
The Honorable Ronald B. Rubin (February 24, 2017): What is impressive to me about this settlement
is in addition to all the usual recitation of road racing litanies is that there is going to be a) public
notice of a real nature and b) about a matter concerning not just money but public safety and then
folks will have the knowledge to decide for themselves whether to take steps to protect themselves
or not. And that’s probably the best thing a government can do is to arm their citizens with
knowledge and then the citizens can make decision. To me that is a key piece of this deal. I think
the notice provisions are exquisite [emphasis added].
IN RE: LG FRONT LOADING WASHING MACHINE CLASS ACTION LITIGATION
Case No. 2:08-cv-00051 (D.N.J.)
The Honorable Madeline Cox Arleo (June 17, 2016): This Court further approves the proposed
methods for giving notice of the Settlement to the Members of the Settlement Class, as reflected in
the Settlement Agreement and the joint motion for preliminary approval. The Court has reviewed
the notices attached as exhibits to the Settlement, the plan for distributing the Summary Notices to
the Settlement Class, and the plan for the Publication Notice's publication in print periodicals and
on the internet, and finds that the Members of the Settlement Class will receive the best notice
practicable under the circumstances. The Court specifically approves the Parties' proposal to use
reasonable diligence to identify potential class members and an associated mailing and/or email
address in the Company's records, and their proposal to direct the ICA to use this information to
send absent class members notice both via first class mail and email. The Court further approves
the plan for the Publication Notice's publication in two national print magazines and on the internet.
The Court also approves payment of notice costs as provided in the Settlement. The Court finds that
these procedures, carried out with reasonable diligence, will constitute the best notice practicable
under the circumstances and will satisfy.
FENLEY V. APPLIED CONSULTANTS, INC.
Case No. 2:15-cv-00259 (W.D. Pa.)
The Honorable Mark R. Hornak (June 16, 2016): The Court would note that it approved notice
provisions of the settlement agreement in the proceedings today. That was all handled by the
settlement and administrator Angeion. The notices were sent. The class list utilized the Postal
Service's national change of address database along with using certain proprietary and other public
resources to verify addresses. the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(c)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e) (l), and
Due Process....
The Court finds and concludes that the mechanisms and methods of notice to the class as identified
were reasonably calculated to provide all notice required by the due process clause, the applicable
rules and statutory provisions, and that the results of the efforts of Angeion were highly successful
and fulfilled all of those requirements [emphasis added].
19
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 37 of 59
FUENTES ET AL. V. UNIRUSH, LLC D/B/A UNIRUSH FINANCIAL SERVICES ET AL.
Case No. 1:15-cv-08372 (S.D.N.Y.)
The Honorable J. Paul Oetken (May 16, 2016): The Court approves, as to form, content, and
distribution, the Claim Form attached to the Settlement Agreement as Exhibit A, the Notice Plan,
and all forms of Notice to the Settlement Class as set forth in the Settlement Agreement and Exhibits
B-D, thereto, and finds that such Notice is the best notice practicable under the circumstances, and
that the Notice complies fully with the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The
Court also finds that the Notice constitutes valid, due and sufficient notice to all persons entitled
thereto, and meets the requirements of Due Process. The Court further finds that the Notice is
reasonably calculated to, under all circumstances, reasonably apprise members of the Settlement
Class of the pendency of the Actions, the terms of the Settlement Agreement, and the right to object
to the settlement and to exclude themselves from the Settlement Class. The Parties, by agreement,
may revise the Notices and Claim Form in ways that are not material, or in ways that are appropriate
to update those documents for purposes of accuracy or formatting for publication.
IN RE: WHIRLPOOL CORP. FRONTLOADING WASHER PRODUCTS LIABILITY
LITIGATION
MDL No. 2001/Case No. 1:08-wp-65000 (N.D. Ohio)
The Honorable Christopher A. Boyko (May 12, 2016): The Court, having reviewed the proposed
Summary Notices, the proposed FAQ, the proposed Publication Notice, the proposed Claim Form,
and the proposed plan for distributing and disseminating each of them, finds and concludes that
the proposed plan for distributing and disseminating each of them will provide the best notice
practicable under the circumstances and satisfies all requirements of federal and state laws and
due process.
SATERIALE ET AL. V. R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO CO.
Case No. 2:09-cv-08394 (C.D. Cal.)
The Honorable Christina A. Snyder (May 3, 2016): The Court finds that the Notice provided to the
Settlement Class pursuant to the Settlement Agreement and the Preliminary Approval Order has
been successful, was the best notice practicable under the circumstances and (1) constituted notice
that was reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise members of the Settlement
Class of the pendency of the Action, their right to object to the Settlement, and their right to appear
at the Final Approval Hearing; (2) was reasonable and constituted due, adequate, and sufficient
notice to all persons entitled to receive notice; and (3) met all applicable requirements of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, Due Process, and the rules of the Court.
FERRERA ET AL. V. SNYDER’S-LANCE, INC.
Case No. 0:13-cv-62496 (S.D. Fla.)
The Honorable Joan A. Lenard (February 12, 2016): The Court approves, as to form and content, the
Long-Form Notice and Short- Form Publication Notice attached to the Memorandum in Support of
Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement as Exhibits 1 and 2 to the Stipulation of
Settlement. The Court also approves the procedure for disseminating notice of the proposed
settlement to the Settlement Class and the Claim Form, as set forth in the Notice and Media Plan
attached to the Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action
Settlement as Exhibits G. The Court finds that the notice to be given constitutes the best notice
practicable under the circumstances, and constitutes valid, due, and sufficient notice to the
20
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 38 of 59
Settlement Class in full compliance with the requirements of applicable law, including the Due
Process Clause of the United States Constitution.
SOTO ET AL. V. THE GALLUP ORGANIZATION, INC.
Case No. 0:13-cv-61747 (S.D. Fla.)
The Honorable Marcia G. Cooke (June 16, 2015): The Court approves the form and substance of the
notice of class action settlement described in ¶ 8 of the Agreement and attached to the Agreement
as Exhibits A, C and D. The proposed form and method for notifying the Settlement Class Members
of the settlement and its terms and conditions meet the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B)
and due process, constitute the best notice practicable under the circumstances, and shall
constitute due and sufficient notice to all persons and entities entitled to the notice. The Court finds
that the proposed notice is clearly designed to advise the Settlement Class Members of their rights.
OTT V. MORTGAGE INVESTORS CORPORATION OF OHIO, INC.
Case No. 3:14-cv-00645 (D. Or.)
The Honorable Janice M. Stewart (July 20, 2015): The Notice Plan, in form, method, and content, fully
complies with the requirements of Rule 23 and due process, constitutes the best notice practicable
under the circumstances, and is due and sufficient notice to all persons entitled thereto. The Court
finds that the Notice Plan is reasonably calculated to, under all circumstances, reasonably apprise
the persons in the Settlement Class of the pendency of this action, the terms of the Settlement
Agreement, and the right to object to the Settlement and to exclude themselves from the Settlement
Class.
IN RE: POOL PRODUCTS DISTRIBUTION MARKET ANTITRUST LITIGATION
MDL No. 2328/Case No. 2:12-md-02328 (E.D. La.)
The Honorable Sarah S. Vance (December 31, 2014): To make up for the lack of individual notice to
the remainder of the class, the parties propose a print and web-based plan for publicizing notice.
The Court welcomes the inclusion of web- based forms of communication in the plan. The Court
finds that the proposed method of notice satisfies the requirements of Rule 23(c)(2)(B) and due
process. The direct emailing of notice to those potential class members for whom Hayward and
Zodiac have a valid email address, along with publication of notice in print and on the web, is
reasonably calculated to apprise class members of the settlement. Moreover, the plan to combine
notice for the Zodiac and Hayward settlements should streamline the process and avoid confusion
that might otherwise be caused by a proliferation of notices for different settlements. Therefore,
the Court approves the proposed notice forms and the plan of notice.
21
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 39 of 59
Exhibit B
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 40 of 59
United States District Court for the Northern District of
California
Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corp.
Case No. 3:21-cv-01418
Class Action Notice
Authorized by the U.S. District Court
Did you reside in There is a To be part of this
California for any $27,500,000 settlement, you
period of time settlement of a should:
between lawsuit.
December 3, 2016 Read this notice.
and [October 30, You may be
2024]? entitled to money. Respond by [date].
Important things to know:
• If you take no action, you will still be bound by the settlement, and your rights
will be affected.
• You can learn more at: ClearPrivacySettlement.com.
Table of Contents
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 41 of 59
Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. 1
About This Notice .............................................................................................................. 3
Why did I get this notice? ...................................................................................................................... 3
What do I do next? ................................................................................................................................... 3
What are the most important dates?................................................................................................. 3
Learning About the Lawsuit ............................................................................................. 4
What is this lawsuit about?.................................................................................................................... 4
Why is there a settlement in this lawsuit?........................................................................................ 4
What happens next in this lawsuit? .................................................................................................... 4
Learning About the Settlement ....................................................................................... 5
What does the settlement provide? ................................................................................................... 5
How do I know if I am part of this settlement?.............................................................................. 6
How much will my payment be? ......................................................................................................... 6
Deciding What to Do ......................................................................................................... 6
How do I weigh my options? ................................................................................................................ 6
Submitting a Claim ............................................................................................................ 7
How do I get a payment if I am a class member? ......................................................................... 7
Do I have a lawyer in this lawsuit? ...................................................................................................... 8
Do I have to pay the lawyers in this lawsuit? .................................................................................. 8
Opting Out .......................................................................................................................... 9
What if I don't want to be part of this settlement? ...................................................................... 9
How do I opt out?..................................................................................................................................... 9
Objecting ............................................................................................................................ 9
What if I disagree with the settlement? ............................................................................................ 9
Doing Nothing ................................................................................................................. 10
What are the consequences of doing nothing? .......................................................................... 10
Key Resources .................................................................................................................. 11
How do I get more information? ...................................................................................................... 11
2
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 42 of 59
About This Notice
Why did I get this notice?
This notice is to tell you about the settlement of a class action lawsuit,
Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corp. brought on behalf of current and former
California residents who allege that Thomson Reuters made information
about them available for sale through its product, CLEAR. You received
this notice because you may be a member of the group of people
affected, called the “class.” This notice gives you a summary of the terms
of the proposed settlement agreement, explains what rights class
members have, and helps class members make informed decisions about
what action to take.
What do I do next?
Read this notice to understand the settlement and to determine if you are
a class member. Then, decide if you want to:
Options More information about each option
Submit a Claim You must submit a claim to receive payment. You will be
Form bound by the settlement.
Do Nothing Get no payment. Give up rights resolved by settlement.
Opt Out Get no payment. Allows you to bring another lawsuit
against Thomson Reuters about the same issues.
Object Tell the Court why you don’t like the settlement.
Read on to understand the specifics of the settlement and what each
choice would mean for you.
What are the most important dates?
Your deadline to object or opt out: [date]
Settlement approval hearing: [date]
Your deadline to submit a claim form: [date]
3
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 43 of 59
Learning About the Lawsuit
What is this lawsuit about?
In December 2020, this class action lawsuit was
filed against Thomson Reuters. The lawsuit was Where can I learn
brought on behalf of current and former more?
California residents who allege that Thomson You can get a complete copy
Reuters made information about them available of the proposed settlement
for sale through its product, CLEAR. The lawsuits and other key documents in
claim that Thomson Reuters violated this lawsuit at:
Californians' privacy rights by selling access to ClearPrivacySettlement.com
their personal information without Californians'
consent.
Thomson Reuters denies that it did anything wrong.
Why is there a settlement in this lawsuit?
In 2024, the parties agreed to settle, which
means they have reached an agreement to
What is a class action
resolve the lawsuit. Both sides want to avoid settlement?
the risk and expense of further litigation. A class action settlement is
an agreement between the
The settlement is on behalf of the Californians parties to resolve and end
who brought the case and all members of the the case. Settlements can
settlement class, which includes all persons provide money to class
who, between December 3, 2016 and [October members and changes to
30, 2024], both resided in the State of the practices that caused
California and whose information Thomson the harm.
Reuters made available through the CLEAR
product. The Court has not decided this case in favor of either side.
What happens next in this lawsuit?
The Court will hold a Fairness hearing to decide whether to approve the
settlement. The hearing will be held at:
4
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 44 of 59
Where: United States District Court for the Northern District of California,
San Francisco Courthouse, Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, 450 Golden Gate
Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102
When: [time] on [date].
The Court has directed the parties to send you this notice about the
proposed settlement. Because the settlement of a class action decides the
rights of all members of the proposed class, the Court must give final
approval to the settlement before it can take effect. Payments will only be
made if the Court approves the settlement.
You don’t have to attend, but you may at your own expense. You may also
ask the Court for permission to speak and express your opinion about the
settlement. If the Court does not approve the settlement or the parties
decide to end it, it will be void and the lawsuit will continue. The date of
the hearing may change without further notice to members of the class. To
learn more and confirm the hearing date, go to
ClearPrivacySettlement.com.
Learning About the Settlement
What does the settlement provide?
The settlement pays money to current and former California residents
whose information was allegedly made available through Thomson
Reuters' product, CLEAR, and will require Thomson Reuters to change
some of its practices in operating CLEAR. Thomson Reuters has agreed to
enhance its opt-out procedure for Californians looking to delete their
personal information from CLEAR or review the information about them in
CLEAR, make more information about CLEAR available to Californians who
want to know more about how their information is used, and make a series
of changes to CLEAR's settings and Thomson Reuters' practices in
managing CLEAR. The full terms of the settlement, including the specific
business practice changes that Thomson Reuters has agreed to implement,
can be found at ClearPrivacySettlement.com.
Thomson Reuters has agreed to pay $27,500,000 into a settlement fund.
This money will be divided among the class members and will also be used
to pay for costs and fees approved by the Court, including attorneys' fees
and the cost of administering this settlement (expected to be no more
5
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 45 of 59
than $700,000). Members of the settlement class will “release” their claims
as part of the settlement, which means, at a minimum, they cannot sue
Thomson Reuters for the same issues in this lawsuit. The full terms of the
release can be found at ClearPrivacySettlement.com.
If there is money left over after the claims process is completed, it will be
donated to organization(s) approved by the Court.
How do I know if I am part of this settlement?
If you resided in California for any period of time between December 3,
2016 and [October 30, 2024], and were 18 years old (or older) during that
time, you may be a member of the class and entitled to money.
How much will my payment be?
The amount of the payments to individual class members will depend on
the number of valid claims submitted. Because the final payment amount
cannot be calculated before all claims for compensation are received and
verified, it is not possible to provide the precise amounts of the payment
for each valid claim before the deadline to file claims.
Deciding What to Do
How do I weigh my options?
You have four options. You can stay in the settlement and submit a claim,
you can opt out of the settlement, you can object to the settlement, or you
can do nothing. This chart shows the effects of each option:
Submit a Do
Opt out Object
Claim Nothing
Can I receive settlement
YES NO YES NO
money if I . . .
Am I bound by the terms
YES NO YES YES
of this lawsuit if I . . .
Can I pursue my own case
NO YES NO NO
if I . . .
Will the class lawyers YES NO NO YES
6
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 46 of 59
represent me if I . . .
Choose the best path for you:
Submitting a Claim
Are you satisfied with the
proposed settlement?
Yes No
Do you want to Do you want to file
receive a payment? your own lawsuit or
not be bound by
this lawsuit?
Yes No
Yes No
Do nothing
Submit a claim
Opt out of
form I don't like the
the
settlement proposed
settlement
Object in writing
and/or appear in
court to explain
why you don't like
it
How do I get a payment if I am a class member?
7
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 47 of 59
If you wish to receive money, you must submit a completed claim form to
the Settlement Administrator online or download a claim form at
ClearPrivacySettlement.com and mail a completed form to the Settlement
Administrator (address below). To submit a proper claim form, you will
have to sign a statement that you lived in California for any period of time
between December 3, 2016 and [October 30, 2024]. That statement will be
made under penalty of perjury, which means that if you knowingly provide
false information in that statement, it is a felony.
Do I have a lawyer in this lawsuit?
In a class action, the court appoints class representatives and lawyers to
work on the case and represent the interests of all the class members. For
this settlement, the Court has appointed the following individuals and
lawyers.
Your lawyers:
Andre M. Mura Geoffrey A. Graber
Gibbs Law Group LLP Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC
1111 Broadway, Suite 2100 1100 New York Ave. NW, Fifth
Oakland, CA 94067 Floor
Washington, DC 20005
These are the lawyers who negotiated this settlement on your behalf.
If you want to be represented by your own lawyer, you may hire one at
your own expense.
Do I have to pay the lawyers in this lawsuit?
Lawyers' fees and costs will be paid from the Settlement Fund. You will
not have to pay the lawyers directly.
To date, your lawyers have not been paid any money for their work or the
expenses that they have paid for the case. To pay for some of their time
and risk in bringing this case without any guarantee of payment unless
they were successful, your lawyers will request, as part of the final approval
of this Settlement, that the Court approve a payment for their legal
services, a request that will not ask for more than $9,075,000 (33%) total in
attorneys’ fees plus the reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses.
8
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 48 of 59
Lawyers' fees and expenses will only be awarded if approved by the Court
as a fair and reasonable amount. You have the right to object to the
lawyers' fees even if you think the settlement terms are fair.
Your lawyers will also ask the Court to approve a payment of $5,000 to
each of the two Class Representatives for the time and effort they
contributed to the case. If approved by the Court, this will be paid from
the Settlement Fund.
Opting Out
What if I don't want to be part of this settlement?
You can opt out. If you do, you will not receive payment and cannot object
to the settlement. However, you will not be bound or affected by anything
that happens in this lawsuit and may be able to file your own case. You
cannot exclude yourself from the program changes called for by the
proposed settlement.
How do I opt out?
To opt out of the settlement, you must complete the opt out form
available at ClearPrivacySettlement.com and mail it by [date] to the
Settlement Administrator at:
CLEAR Privacy Settlement
Attn: Opt Outs
P.O. Box 58220
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Be sure to include your name, address, telephone number (and/or email
address), and signature. The full instructions for submitting an opt-out are
available at ClearPrivacySettlement.com.
Objecting
What if I disagree with the settlement?
9
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 49 of 59
If you disagree with any part of the settlement (including the lawyers' fees)
but don’t want to opt out, you may object. You must give reasons why you
think the Court should not approve it and say whether your objection
applies to just you, a part of the class, or the entire class. The Court will
consider your views. The Court can only approve or deny the settlement —
it cannot change the terms of the settlement. You may, but don’t need to,
hire your own lawyer to help you.
To object, you must send a letter to the Court that:
(1) is received by [date];
(2) includes the case name and number (Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corp.,
No. 3:21-cv-01418)
(3) includes your full name, address and telephone number, and email
address (if you have one);
(4) states the reasons for your objection;
(5) says whether either you or your lawyer intend to appear at the final
approval hearing and your lawyer's name;
(6) your signature.
Mail the letter to:
U.S. District Court
San Francisco Courthouse,
Courtroom 5 - 17th Floor
450 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
Doing Nothing
What are the consequences of doing nothing?
If you do nothing, you will not get any money, but you will still be bound
by the settlement and its “release” provisions. That means you won’t be
able to start, continue, or be part of any other lawsuit against, at minimum,
Thomson Reuters about the issues in this case. Please see the settlement
agreement, which can be found at ClearPrivacySettlement.com for a full
description of the claims and persons who will be released if this
settlement is approved.
10
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 50 of 59
Key Resources
How do I get more information?
This notice is a summary of the proposed settlement. The complete
settlement with all its terms can be found here. To get a copy of the
settlement agreement or get answers to your questions:
• contact your lawyer (information below)
• visit the case website at ClearPrivacySettlement.com
• access the Court Electronic Records (PACER) system online or by
visiting the Clerk’s office of the Court (address below).
Resource Contact Information
Case website ClearPrivacySettlement.com
Settlement CLEAR Privacy Settlement
Administrator c/o Settlement Administrator
1650 Arch Street, Suite 2210
Philadelphia, PA 19103
[Phone Number]
[Email Address]
Your Lawyers Andre M. Mura
Gibbs Law Group LLP
1111 Broadway, Suite 2100
Oakland, CA 94067
Geoffrey A. Graber
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC
1100 New York Ave. NW, Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20005
Court (DO NOT U.S. District Court
CONTACT) San Francisco Courthouse, Courtroom 5 - 17th
Floor
450 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
11
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 51 of 59
Exhibit C
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 52Your of 59
claim must
Your claim must Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corp.
be submitted Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC be submitted
online or United States District Court, Northern District of California online or
received by: received by:
[DEADLINE] CLEAR PRIVACY SETTLEMENT CLAIM FORM [DEADLINE]
I. SETTLEMENT CLASS MEMBER NAME AND CONTACT INFORMATION
Provide your name, mailing address, telephone and/or email address. You must notify the Settlement
Administrator if your contact information changes after you submit this Claim Form.
First Name Last Name
Street Address
City State Zip Code
Email Address Telephone Number
Please indicate where in California you resided for any period of time between December 3, 2016 and
[October 30, 2024] (if different than above):
Street Address
City State Zip Code
II. PAYMENT SELECTION
Please select from one of the following payment options:
Venmo - Enter the mobile number associated with your Venmo account: __ __ __-__ __ __-__ __ __ __
Zelle - Enter the mobile number or email address associated with your Zelle account:
Mobile Number: __ __ __-__ __ __-__ __ __ __ or Email Address: ___________________________________
Virtual Prepaid Card - Enter your email address: ____________________________________
Physical Check - Payment will be mailed to the address provided in Section I above.
III. ATTESTATION & SIGNATURE
By signing below and submitting this Claim Form, I hereby swear under penalty of perjury that I resided in
California for any period of time between December 3, 2016 and [October 30, 2024].
Signature Printed Name Date
Mail your completed Claim Form to:
CLEAR Privacy Settlement, c/o Settlement Administrator, 1650 Arch Street, Suite 2210, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
QUESTIONS? VISIT WWW.CLEARPRIVACYSETTLEMENT.COM OR CALL TOLL-FREE 1-XXX-XXX-XXXX
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 53 of 59
Exhibit D
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMCBrooks
Document 241-2
v. Thomson Filed
Reuters Corp.08/29/24 Page 54 of 59
Your request for Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Your request for
exclusion must be United States District Court, Northern District of California exclusion must be
received by: received by:
[DATE] CLEAR PRIVACY SETTLEMENT [DATE]
REQUEST FOR EXCLUSION
I. SETTLEMENT CLASS MEMBER NAME AND CONTACT INFORMATION
Provide your name, mailing address, telephone and/or email address.
First Name Last Name
Street Address
City State Zip Code
Email Address Telephone Number
II. SIGNATURE
By signing below and submitting this Request for Exclusion form, I swear under penalty of perjury that I resided
in California for any period of time between December 3, 2016 and [October 30, 2024] and wish to exclude myself
from the Settlement Class and do not wish to participate in the settlement in Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corp.,
No. 3:21-cv-01418.
Signature Printed Name Date
Mail your completed Request for Exclusion Form to:
CLEAR Privacy Settlement
Attn: Opt Outs
P.O. Box 58220
Philadelphia, PA 19102
QUESTIONS? VISIT WWW.CLEARPRIVACYSETTLEMENT.COM OR CALL TOLL-FREE 1-XXX-XXX-XXXX
Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Page 55 of 59
Exhibit E
cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Pa
If you resided in California
for any period of time
between December 3, 2016
and [October 30, 2024], a
class action settlement may
affect your rights.
Click here for more information
cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Pa
If you resided in California
for any period of time
between December 3, 2016
Ifand
you resided
[Octoberin California
30, 2024 for],any
a
period of time between December
class action settlement may
3, 2016 and October 17, 2024, a class
affect
action your rights.
settlement may affect your
rights.
Click here for more information
cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Pa
If you resided in California for
any period of time between
December 3, 2016 and
If[October in, California
you resided30 2024], a for
class
any
action
period of settlement
time between December
3, 2016 and October 17, 2024, a class
may affect your
action settlement may affect your
rights.
rights.
Click here for more information
cv-01418-EMC Document 241-2 Filed 08/29/24 Pa
If you resided in
California for any
period of time
between
December 3, 2016
and [October 30, 2024],
a class action settlement
may affect your rights.
Click here for more information
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.cand.374304.241.2.pdf
- Size
- 3,087,435 bytes
- SHA-256
- 54193c1e0e408fab25fae4af534654ada0b62065fad30483257bf7d23d3ba046
- Original
- PACER (login required)