Case 9:14-cv DMM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
|
|
- Irma Short
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 1 of 9 THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ACTING THROUGH ITS FIRE AND POLICE PENSION SYSTEM, ACTING BY ORDER OF AND THROUGH ITS BOARD OF FIRE AND POLICE PENSION COMMISSIONERS, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, vs. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE No. 9:14-cv DMM Plaintiff, BANKRATE, INC., EDWARD J. DIMARIA, KENNETH S. ESTEROW, GOLDMAN SACHS & CO., MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED, RBC CAPITAL MARKETS, LLC, and STEPHENS, INC., Defendants. REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF (I) LEAD PLAINTIFF S MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AND PLAN OF ALLOCATION AND (II) LEAD COUNSEL S MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS FEES AND EXPENSES
2 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 2 of 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT... 1 II. ARGUMENT... 2 A. The Settlement Class s Reaction Strongly Supports Approval of the Settlement and the Plan of Allocation... 2 B. The Settlement Class s Reaction Also Strongly Supports Approval of Lead Counsel s Fee and Expense Requests... 3 III. CONCLUSION... 4 i
3 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 3 of 9 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Cases Bennett v. Behring Corp., 737 F.2d 982 (11th Cir. 1984)...2 Camp v. City of Pelham, No. 2:10-cv MHH, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (N.D. Ala. May 1, 2014)...3 In re Chicken Antitrust Litig. Am. Poultry, 669 F.2d 228 (5th Cir. 1982)...3 In re EVCI Career Colls. Holding Corp. Sec. Litig., No. 05 Civ (CM), 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (S.D.N.Y. July 27, 2007)...3 In re Healthsouth Corp. Secs. Litig., No. CV-03-BE-1500-S, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (N.D. Ala. Feb. 12, 2008)...3 Lipuma v. Am. Express Co., 406 F. Supp. 2d 1298 (S.D. Fla. 2005)...2, 3 Morgan v. Public Storage, Case No.: 14-cv Ungaro/Otazo-Reyes, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (S.D. Fla. Mar. 9, 2016)...3 Pinto v. Princess Cruise Lines, 513 F. Supp. 2d 1334 (S.D. Fla. 2007)...3 Thorpe v. Walter Inv. Mgmt. Corp., Case No. 1:14-cv UU, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (S.D. Fla. Oct. 14, 2016)...2 ii
4 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 4 of 9 Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Court-appointed Lead Plaintiff, the City of Los Angeles, Acting through its Fire and Police Pension System, Acting by order of and through its Board of Fire and Police Pension Commissioners ( Lead Plaintiff ), on behalf of itself and the Settlement Class 1 in the Action, respectfully submits this reply memorandum of law in further support of (1) Lead Plaintiff s Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Plan of Allocation (DE 158) and (2) Lead Counsel s Motion for an Award of Attorneys Fees and Expenses (DE 159). I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT In accordance with the Court s Order Granting Lead Plaintiff s Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Proposed Class Action Settlement dated August 24, 2016 (DE 156) 2, the Court-authorized Claims Administrator for the Settlement, JND Legal Administration ( JND ), has disseminated over 37,180 copies of the Notice to potential Settlement Class Members and nominees. 3 The Notice informed recipients of, among other things, the essential terms of the Settlement, the Plan of Allocation, and Lead Counsel s intention to apply to the Court for an award of attorneys fees in an amount not to exceed 10% of the Settlement Fund and reimbursement of expenses paid or incurred in connection with the institution, prosecution and resolution of the claims against Defendants, in an amount not to exceed $250,000. In addition, the Notice along with the papers in support of final approval of the Settlement, the Plan of Allocation, and Lead Counsel s fee and expense requests was made available on the website established for the Settlement, and the Summary Notice was published in Investor s Business Daily and transmitted over PR Newswire. 4 The January 17, 1 All capitalized terms that are not defined herein have the meanings set forth in the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement, dated July 18, 2016 (DE 154) (the Stipulation ) and the Declaration of Andrew L. Zivitz and Johnston de F. Whitman, Jr. in Support of: (I) Lead Plaintiff s Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Plan of Allocation; and (II) Lead Counsel s Motion for an Award of Attorneys Fees and Expenses (DE 160). 2 This Order was amended on August 25, 2016 (DE 157) to revise the date of the Settlement Fairness Hearing. 3 See Supplemental Affidavit of Jennifer M. Keough Regarding (A) Mailing of the Notice and Proof of Claim Form; (B) Report on Requests for Exclusion Received; and (C) Report on Proof of Claim Forms Received to Date, dated January 27, 2017 (the Supp. JND Aff. ) at 3, attached hereto as Exhibit A. 4 See Affidavit of Jennifer M. Keough Regarding (A) Mailing of the Notice and Proof of Claim Form; (B) Publication of the Summary Notice; (C) Establishment of the Telephone Hotline; (D) 1
5 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 5 of deadline to file an objection to any aspect of the Settlement or to submit a request for exclusion from the Settlement Class has passed. Lead Plaintiff and Lead Counsel are pleased to advise the Court that they have not received a single objection to the Settlement, the Plan of Allocation, or the requested attorneys fees and expenses. In addition, no requests for exclusion from the Settlement Class have been received. Supp. JND Aff. at 5. Further, the Court-appointed Lead Plaintiff, which has prosecuted, monitored, and overseen this complex litigation, supports both the Settlement and Lead Counsel s application for attorneys fees and expenses. The absence of any objection to the Settlement, the Plan of Allocation, or the fee and expense requests, as well as the lack of any request for exclusion from the Settlement Class, support the Court s approval of both pending motions. II. ARGUMENT A. The Settlement Class s Reaction Strongly Supports Approval of the Settlement and the Plan of Allocation Lead Plaintiff and Lead Counsel respectfully submit that their opening papers in support of the motion for final approval of the Settlement and Plan of Allocation amply demonstrate that the motion should be granted. Now that the time for submitting objections has passed, the Settlement Class s reaction also clearly supports approval. As discussed in Lead Plaintiff s opening papers (DEs 158 & 160), the Eleventh Circuit has established the substance and amount of opposition to the settlement as a factor for courts to consider in determining whether a proposed class action settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate. See Bennett v. Behring Corp., 737 F.2d 982, 986 (11th Cir. 1984); see also Lipuma v. Am. Express Co., 406 F. Supp. 2d 1298, 1324 (S.D. Fla. 2005) ( In determining whether a proposed settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate, the reaction of the class is an important factor. ). To that end, it is well settled that the complete absence or even a small number of objections to a proposed class action settlement is strong evidence that the settlement is fair and reasonable. See Thorpe v. Walter Inv. Mgmt. Corp., Case No. 1:14-cv UU, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS , at *10-11 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 14, 2016) ( The overwhelmingly positive reaction of class members to a proposed settlement is a significant factor, and the absence of objections is Establishment of the Settlement Website; and (E) Report on Requests for Exclusion Received to Date, dated December 29, 2016 (DE 160-1) (the JND Aff. ), at 12. 2
6 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 6 of 9 excellent evidence of the settlement s fairness and adequacy. ) (citation omitted); Camp v. City of Pelham, No. 2:10-cv MHH, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60496, at *11 (N.D. Ala. May 1, 2014) ( The lack of objections points to the reasonableness of [the] proposed settlement and supports its approval. ) (citation omitted); Lipuma, 406 F. Supp. 2d at 1324 (finding that even a low percentage of objections points to the reasonableness of a proposed settlement and supports its approval ). Following the thorough notice campaign undertaken in accordance with the Court s Preliminary Approval Order, the fact that there is not a single objection strongly supports approval of the Settlement. In addition, there have been no objections to the Plan of Allocation. As discussed in Lead Plaintiff s opening papers, just like the Settlement as a whole, a proposed plan of allocation must be fair, reasonable and adequate. See In re Chicken Antitrust Litig. Am. Poultry, 669 F.2d 228, 238 (5th Cir. 1982). Here, Lead Counsel submits that the Plan of Allocation which was prepared after careful consideration and with the assistance of Lead Plaintiff s damages consultant is fair and reasonable. See DE 158, pp The Settlement Class s reaction provides additional strong support for approving the Plan of Allocation. 5 B. The Settlement Class s Reaction Also Strongly Supports Approval of Lead Counsel s Fee and Expense Requests Finally, no Settlement Class Member has objected to Lead Counsel s motion for an award of attorneys fees and reimbursement of expenses. The lack of any objection is strong evidence that the requested amount of fees and expenses is reasonable. See Morgan v. Public Storage, Case No.: 14-cv Ungaro/Otazo-Reyes, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54937, at *44-45 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 9, 2016) (finding receipt of only one timely objection to the requested attorneys fees to weigh in favor of the requested fee award), Pinto v. Princess Cruise Lines, 513 F. Supp. 2d 1334, 1343 (S.D. Fla. 2007) ( Here, none of the over 18,000 Class members has objected to Class Counsel s fee request. That this sizeable class did not give rise to a single objection on the fees request further justifies the full award. ). 5 See In re Healthsouth Corp. Secs. Litig., Consolidated Case No. CV-03-BE-1500-S, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS , at *7-8 (N.D. Ala. Feb. 12, 2008) (finding only one objection to the plan of allocation to be a reflection of the fairness of the Plan of Allocation to the Class Members as a whole ); In re EVCI Career Colls. Holding Corp. Sec. Litig., No. 05 Civ (CM), 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57918, at *34 (S.D.N.Y. July 27, 2007) (courts should consider the reaction of a class to a plan of allocation and, where no objections are received, the Plan of Allocation should be approved ). 3
7 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 7 of 9 III. CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed in this reply memorandum and detailed in Lead Plaintiff s and Lead Counsel s opening papers, Lead Plaintiff and Lead Counsel respectfully request that the Court approve (i) the Settlement; (ii) the Plan of Allocation; and (iii) Lead Counsel s request for attorneys fees and expenses. Proposed orders are attached hereto as Exhibit B, C and D. Dated: January 30, 2017 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Lester Hooker Lester Hooker Florida Bar No lhooker@saxenawhite.com Joseph E. White Florida Bar No jwhite@saxenawhite.com SAXENA WHITE P.A. Boca Center, 5200 Town Center Circle, Suite 601 Boca Raton, FL Ph: (561) Liaison Counsel for the Settlement Class Johnston de F. Whitman, Jr. (admitted pro hac vice) jwhitman@ktmc.com Andrew L. Zivitz (admitted pro hac vice) azivitz@ktmc.com Kimberly A. Justice (admitted pro hac vice) kjustice@ktmc.com KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK LLP 280 King of Prussia Road Radnor, PA Ph: (610) and- Jennifer L. Joost (admitted pro hac vice) jjoost@ktmc.com 1 Sansome Street, Suite 1850 San Francisco, CA Ph: (415) Counsel for Lead Plaintiff The City of Los Angeles, Acting Through its Fire and Police Pension 4
8 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 8 of 9 System, Acting by Order of and Through its Board of Fire and Police Pension Commissioners, and Lead Counsel for the Settlement Class 5
9 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 9 of 9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on January 30, 2017, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system. Notice of this filing will be sent to counsel of record by operation of the Court s electronic filing system. I certify under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January 30, /s/lester R. Hooker Lester R. Hooker 6
10 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT A
11 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 2 of 4
12 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 3 of 4
13 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 4 of 4
14 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 1 of 11 EXHIBIT B
15 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 2 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 9:14-cv DMM THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ACTING THROUGH ITS FIRE AND POLICE PENSION SYSTEM, ACTING BY ORDER OF AND THROUGH ITS BOARD OF FIRE AND POLICE PENSION COMMISSIONERS, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. BANKRATE, INC., EDWARD J. DIMARIA, KENNETH S. ESTEROW, GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO., MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED, RBC CAPITAL MARKETS, LLC, AND STEPHENS, INC., Defendants. JUDGMENT APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT WHEREAS, a securities class action is pending in this Court entitled The City of Los Angeles, et al. v. Bankrate, Inc., et al., Case No. 9:14-cv DMM (the Action ); WHEREAS, (a) the City of Los Angeles, Acting through its Fire and Police Pension System, Acting by order of and through its Board of Fire and Police Pension Commissioners ( Lead Plaintiff ), on behalf of itself and the Settlement Class (defined below), and (b) defendants Bankrate, Inc. ( Bankrate ), Edward J. DiMaria, Kenneth S. Esterow, Goldman, Sachs & Co., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, RBC Capital Markets, LLC, and Stephens, Inc. (collectively, Defendants ) have determined to settle and dismiss the Action with prejudice on the terms and conditions set forth in the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement dated July 18, 2016 (the Stipulation ), that provides for a complete dismissal with prejudice of the Action against Defendants on the terms and conditions set forth in the Stipulation, subject to the approval of this Court (the Settlement ); 1 # v10
16 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 3 of 11 WHEREAS, unless otherwise defined in this Judgment, the capitalized terms herein shall have the same meaning as they have in the Stipulation; WHEREAS, by Order dated August 25, 2016 (the Preliminary Approval Order ), this Court: (a) preliminarily approved the Settlement; (b) preliminarily certified the Settlement Class for settlement purposes only; (c) ordered that notice of the proposed Settlement be provided to potential Settlement Class Members; (d) provided Settlement Class Members with the opportunity either to exclude themselves from the Settlement Class or to object to the proposed Settlement; and (e) scheduled a hearing regarding final approval of the Settlement; WHEREAS, due and adequate notice has been given to the Settlement Class; WHEREAS, the Court conducted a hearing on February 6, 2017 (the Settlement Hearing ) to consider, among other things, (a) whether the terms and conditions of the Settlement are fair, reasonable, and adequate to the Settlement Class, and should therefore be approved; and (b) whether a judgment should be entered dismissing the Action with prejudice as against the Defendants; and WHEREAS, the Court having reviewed and considered the Stipulation, all papers filed and proceedings held herein in connection with the Settlement, all oral and written comments received regarding the Settlement, and the record in the Action, and good cause appearing therefor; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: 1. Jurisdiction: The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Action, and all matters relating to the Settlement, as well as personal jurisdiction over all of the Parties and each of the Settlement Class Members. 2. Incorporation of Settlement Documents: This Judgment incorporates and makes a part hereof: (a) the Stipulation filed with the Court on July 18, 2016; and (b) the Notice and the Summary Notice, substantially similar forms of which were filed with the Court on July 18, # v10
17 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 4 of Certification of the Settlement Class for Purposes of Settlement: Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court finally certifies, solely for purposes of effectuating the Settlement, this Action as a class action on behalf of a Settlement Class defined as all persons and entities who or which purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Bankrate during the period from October 27, 2011 through October 9, 2014, inclusive (the Settlement Class Period ), including in the March 2014 Secondary Offering of Bankrate common stock. Excluded from the Settlement Class are Defendants and Former Defendants; members of the Immediate Family of any Defendant or Former Defendant; any firm, trust, corporation, or other entity in which any Defendant or Former Defendant has or had a controlling interest, and any legal representatives, heirs, successors-in-interest, or assigns of any such excluded person. Notwithstanding the foregoing exclusions, Investment Vehicles shall not be excluded from the Settlement Class. 4. Lead Plaintiff is hereby appointed, for purposes of effectuating the Settlement only, as Class Representative for purposes of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, which was appointed by the Court to serve as Lead Counsel, is hereby appointed, for settlement purposes only, as Class Counsel pursuant to Rules 23(c)(1)(B) and (g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 5. Notice: The Court finds that the dissemination of the Notice and the publication of the Summary Notice: (a) were implemented in accordance with the Preliminary Approval Order; (b) constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances; (c) constituted notice that was reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise Settlement Class Members of (i) the pendency of the Action; (ii) their right to exclude themselves from the Settlement Class; (iii) the effect of the proposed Settlement (including the releases to be provided thereunder); (iv) Lead Counsel s motion for an award of attorneys fees and reimbursement of Litigation Expenses; (v) 3 # v10
18 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 5 of 11 their right to object to any aspect of the Settlement, the Plan of Allocation, and/or Lead Counsel s motion for attorneys fees and reimbursement of Litigation Expenses; and (vi) their right to appear at the Settlement Hearing; (d) constituted due, adequate, and sufficient notice to all persons and entities entitled to receive notice of the proposed Settlement; and (e) satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, the United States Constitution (including the Due Process Clause), the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 15 U.S.C. 78u-4(a)(7), 15 U.S.C. 77z-1(a)(7), and all other applicable law and rules. 6. Final Settlement Approval and Dismissal of Claims: Pursuant to, and in accordance with, Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court hereby fully and finally approves the Settlement set forth in the Stipulation in all respects (including, without limitation: the amount of the Settlement; the releases provided for therein; and the dismissal with prejudice of the claims asserted against Defendants in the Action), and finds that the Settlement is, in all respects, fair, reasonable and adequate to the Settlement Class. The Parties are directed to implement, perform and consummate the Settlement in accordance with the terms and provisions contained in the Stipulation. 7. The Action is hereby dismissed with prejudice. The Parties shall bear their own costs and expenses, except as otherwise expressly provided in the Stipulation. 8. Binding Effect: The terms of the Stipulation and of this Judgment shall be forever binding on Defendants, Lead Plaintiff, and all Settlement Class Members (regardless of whether or not any individual Settlement Class Member submits a Claim Form or seeks or obtains a distribution from the Net Settlement Fund), as well as their respective heirs, executors, trustees, administrators, predecessors, successors, and assigns, in their capacities as such. The persons and entities listed on Exhibit 1 hereto are excluded from the Settlement Class pursuant to request and are not bound by the terms of the Stipulation or this Judgment. 4 # v10
19 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 6 of Releases: The releases set forth in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Stipulation, together with the definitions contained in paragraph 1 of the Stipulation relating thereto, are expressly incorporated herein in all respects. The releases are effective as of the Effective Date. Accordingly, this Court orders that: (a) Upon the Effective Date of the Settlement, without further action by anyone, Lead Plaintiff and each of the Settlement Class Members (whether or not such Person submits a Claim Form), on behalf of themselves and each of their respective heirs, executors, trustees, administrators, predecessors, successors, assigns, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors, agents, fiduciaries, beneficiaries or legal representatives, in their capacities as such, and any other person or entity who or that was, is, or would be legally entitled to bring Claims Released By Plaintiffs on behalf of a Settlement Class Member, in that capacity, shall be deemed to have, and by operation of law and of the judgment shall have, fully, finally, and forever compromised, settled, released, resolved, relinquished, waived, discharged, and dismissed each and every Claim Released By Plaintiffs (including, without limitation, any Unknown Claims) against the Defendants and the other Defendant Related Parties, and shall forever be enjoined from prosecuting any or all of the Claims Released By Plaintiffs against any of the Defendant Related Parties. This release shall not apply to any claims of any Person who or which submits a request for exclusion from the Settlement Class that is accepted by the Court. (b) Upon the Effective Date of the Settlement, without further action by anyone, Defendants, on behalf of themselves and each of their respective heirs, executors, trustees, administrators, predecessors, successors, assigns, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors, agents, fiduciaries, beneficiaries or legal representatives, in their capacities as such, and any other person or entity who or that was, is, or would be legally entitled to bring Claims Released By Defendants on behalf of any Defendant, in that capacity, shall be deemed to have, and by operation 5 # v10
20 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 7 of 11 of law and of the judgment shall have, fully, finally, and forever compromised, settled, released, resolved, relinquished, waived, and discharged each and every Claim Released by Defendants (including, without limitation, any Unknown Claims) against Lead Plaintiff and the other Plaintiff Related Parties, and shall forever be enjoined from prosecuting any or all of the Claims Released By Defendants against Lead Plaintiff or any of the Plaintiff Related Parties. This release (i) shall not apply to any Person who or which submits a request for exclusion from the Settlement Class that is accepted by the Court, and (ii) does not release any claims of any nature of any Defendant against Defendants insurers. 10. Notwithstanding paragraphs 9(a) (b) above, nothing in this Judgment shall bar any action by any of the Parties to enforce or effectuate the terms of the Stipulation or this Judgment. 11. Upon the Effective Date of the Settlement, Lead Plaintiff and each and every Settlement Class Member shall be permanently barred and enjoined from directly or indirectly, or through a third party, instituting, reinstituting, initiating, commencing, maintaining, continuing, filing, encouraging, soliciting, collaborating in, or otherwise prosecuting, against Defendants or any of the other Defendant Related Parties any of the Claims Released By Plaintiffs, whether in this Court, in any other forum, or otherwise, provided, however, that this Judgment shall not preclude any action to enforce the terms of the Stipulation or any action or claims, including but not limited to the Claims Released By Plaintiffs, that Defendants may have against any Defendant Related Parties, including but not limited to its insurers. 12. Bar Order and Judgment Reduction: Pursuant to the provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Pub.L. No , 109 Stat. 737, 15 U.S.C. 78u-4(f)(7) (the PSLRA ), the Court hereby bars all future claims for contribution and indemnification (or any other claim where the injury to the non-settling person or entity is the non-settling person s or entity s liability to the Settlement Class) arising out of the Action (a) by any Person against any 6 # v10
21 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 8 of 11 settling covered person (as defined in the PSLRA), and (b) by the settling covered person (as defined in the PSLRA) against any Person, other than a Person whose liability to the Settlement Class has been extinguished by the settlement of the settling covered person, provided, however, that this bar shall not preclude any action to enforce the terms of the Stipulation or any action or claims, including but not limited to the Claims Released By Plaintiffs, that Defendants may have against any Defendant Related Parties, including but not limited to their insurers, and provided, further, that this bar shall not include, and nothing in this Judgment shall release or alter, the contractual rights, if any, (i) between or among the Underwriter Defendants under their applicable Agreement Among Underwriters relating to any offering of securities by Bankrate, (ii) between the Underwriter Defendants, on the one hand, and Bankrate, on the other hand, under any applicable Underwriting Agreements with respect to any right of indemnification or contribution in connection with the payment of the Settlement Amount or incurrence of defense costs, or (iii) between any other Defendant or Former Defendant, on the one hand, and Bankrate, on the other hand, under any applicable agreements with respect to any right of indemnification or contribution in connection with the payment of the Settlement Amount or incurrence of defense costs. 13. Any final verdict or judgment that may be obtained by or on behalf of the Settlement Class or a Settlement Class Member against any person or entity subject to the Bar Order in paragraph 12 above shall be reduced by the greater of: (a) an amount that corresponds to the percentage of responsibility of the Defendant for common damages; or (b) the amount paid by or on behalf of the Defendant to the Settlement Class or Settlement Class Member for common damages. 14. Rule 11 Findings: The Court finds and concludes that the Parties and their respective counsel have complied in all respects with the requirements of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in connection with the institution, prosecution, defense, and settlement of the Action. 7 # v10
22 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 9 of No Admissions: Neither this Judgment, the Memorandum of Understanding, the Stipulation (whether or not the Settlement is consummated), including the exhibits thereto, the Plan of Allocation contained therein (or any other plan of allocation that may be approved by the Court), and/or the Supplemental Agreement, nor the negotiations leading to the execution of the Memorandum of Understanding, the Stipulation, and/or the Supplemental Agreement, nor any proceedings taken pursuant to or in connection with the Memorandum of Understanding, the Stipulation, the Supplemental Agreement, and/or approval of the Settlement (including any arguments proffered in connection therewith): (a) shall be offered against any of the Defendant Related Parties as evidence of, or construed as, or deemed to be evidence of any presumption, concession, or admission by any of the Defendant Related Parties with respect to the truth of any fact alleged by Lead Plaintiff or the validity of any claim that was or could have been asserted or the deficiency of any defense that has been or could have been asserted in this Action or in any other litigation, or of any fault, misrepresentation, or omission with respect to any statement or written document approved or made by any of the Defendant Related Parties, or of any liability, negligence, fault, or other wrongdoing of any kind of any of the Defendant Related Parties or in any way referred to for any other reason as against any of the Defendant Related Parties, in any civil, criminal, or administrative action or proceeding, other than such proceedings as may be necessary to effectuate the provisions of the Stipulation; (b) shall be offered against any of the Plaintiff Related Parties, as evidence of, or construed as, or deemed to be evidence of any presumption, concession, or admission by any of the Plaintiff Related Parties that any of their claims are without merit, that any of the Defendant Related Parties had meritorious defenses, or that damages recoverable under the Complaints would not have exceeded the Settlement Amount or with respect to any liability, negligence, fault, or wrongdoing of 8 # v10
23 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 10 of 11 any kind, or in any way referred to for any other reason as against any of the Plaintiff Related Parties, in any civil, criminal, or administrative action or proceeding, other than such proceedings as may be necessary to effectuate the provisions of the Stipulation; or (c) shall be construed against any of the Defendant Related Parties or the Plaintiff Related Parties as an admission, concession, or presumption that the consideration to be given hereunder represents the amount which could be or would have been recovered after trial; provided, however, that if this Stipulation is approved by the Court, the Parties, the Defendant Related Parties, the Plaintiff Related Parties and their respective counsel may refer to it to effectuate the protections from liability granted hereunder or otherwise to enforce the terms of the Settlement; and provided further that nothing herein shall limit the materials or evidence that may be offered or referred to by Defendant Related Parties in disputes, actions, or proceedings arising between Defendant Related Parties. 16. Retention of Jurisdiction: Without affecting the finality of this Judgment in any way, this Court retains continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over: (a) the Parties for purposes of the administration, interpretation, implementation and enforcement of the Settlement; (b) the disposition of the Settlement Fund; (c) any motion for an award of attorneys fees and/or Litigation Expenses by Lead Counsel in the Action that will be paid from the Settlement Fund; (d) any motion to approve the Plan of Allocation; (e) any motion to approve the Class Distribution Order; and (f) the Settlement Class Members for all matters relating to the Action. 17. Separate orders shall be entered regarding approval of a plan of allocation and the motion of Lead Counsel for an award of attorneys fees and reimbursement of Litigation Expenses. Such orders shall in no way affect or delay the finality of this Judgment and shall not affect or delay the Effective Date of the Settlement. 9 # v10
24 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 11 of Modification of the Agreement of Settlement: Without further approval from the Court, Lead Plaintiff and Defendants are hereby authorized to agree to and adopt such amendments or modifications of the Stipulation or any exhibits attached thereto to effectuate the Settlement that: (a) are not materially inconsistent with this Judgment; and (b) do not materially limit the rights of Settlement Class Members in connection with the Settlement. Without further order of the Court, Lead Plaintiff and Defendants may agree to reasonable extensions of time to carry out any provisions of the Settlement. In accordance with paragraph 45 of the Stipulation, any such modifications must be reflected in a writing signed on behalf of both Lead Plaintiff and Defendants (or their successors-in-interest). 19. Termination of Settlement: If the Settlement is terminated as provided in the Stipulation or the Effective Date of the Settlement otherwise fails to occur, this Judgment shall be vacated, rendered null and void, and be of no further force and effect, except as otherwise provided by the Stipulation, and this Judgment shall be without prejudice to the rights of Lead Plaintiff, Settlement Class Members and Defendants, and the Parties shall revert to their respective positions in the Action on the day prior to the first date on which a Party executed the Stipulation. 20. Entry of Final Judgment: There is no just reason to delay the entry of this Judgment as a final judgment in this Action. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is expressly directed to immediately enter this final Judgment in this Action. SO ORDERED this day of, The Honorable Donald M. Middlebrooks United States District Judge 10 # v10
25 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT C
26 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 2 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 9:14-cv DMM THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ACTING THROUGH ITS FIRE AND POLICE PENSION SYSTEM, ACTING BY ORDER OF AND THROUGH ITS BOARD OF FIRE AND POLICE PENSION COMMISSIONERS, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. BANKRATE, INC., EDWARD J. DIMARIA, KENNETH S. ESTEROW, GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO., MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED, RBC CAPITAL MARKETS, LLC, AND STEPHENS, INC., Defendants. [PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING PLAN OF ALLOCATION This matter is before the Court on Lead Plaintiff s Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Plan of Allocation, filed on December 30, 2016 (DE 158). All capitalized terms used herein have the meanings set forth in the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement, dated July 18, 2016, and filed the same day (DE 154). The Court having considered all papers filed and proceedings had herein and otherwise being fully informed of the matters hereto and good cause appearing therefore; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that: 1. This Court has jurisdiction to enter this Order. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Action and all matters relating thereto, and over all Parties to the Action, including all members of the Settlement Class. 2. Pursuant to and in compliance with Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court hereby finds and concludes that due and adequate notice was directed to all Persons and entities who are Settlement Class Members, including individual notice to those Settlement Class
27 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 3 of 3 Members who could be identified through reasonable effort, advising them of the Plan of Allocation and of their right to object thereto, and a full and fair opportunity was accorded to Persons and entities who are Settlement Class Members to be heard with respect to the Plan of Allocation, and no objections to the Plan of Allocation have been filed. 3. The Court hereby finds and concludes that the Plan of Allocation for the calculation of the claims of Authorized Claimants which is set forth in the Notice of Pendency of Class Action, Certification of Settlement Class, Proposed Settlement, and Settlement Fairness Hearing (the Notice ), filed on July 18, 2016 (DE 154-2), approved by the Court on August 26, 2016 (DE 157), and disseminated to Settlement Class Members, provides a fair and reasonable basis upon which to allocate the net settlement proceeds established by the Settlement among Settlement Class Members, with due consideration having been given to administrative convenience and necessity. 4. The Court hereby finds and concludes that the Plan of Allocation set forth in the Notice is, in all respects, fair and reasonable and the Court hereby approves the Plan of Allocation. 5. Any appeal or any challenge affecting this Court s approval of the Plan of Allocation shall in no way disturb or affect the finality of the Judgment entered with respect to the Settlement. 6. Jurisdiction is hereby retained over the Parties and Settlement Class Members for all matters relating to this Action, including the administration, interpretation, effectuation or enforcement of the Stipulation and this Order. 7. The Court directs immediate entry of this Order by the Clerk of the Court. SO ORDERED this day of, The Honorable Donald M. Middlebrooks United States District Judge 2
28 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT D
29 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 2 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 9:14-cv DMM THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ACTING THROUGH ITS FIRE AND POLICE PENSION SYSTEM, ACTING BY ORDER OF AND THROUGH ITS BOARD OF FIRE AND POLICE PENSION COMMISSIONERS, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. BANKRATE, INC., EDWARD J. DIMARIA, KENNETH S. ESTEROW, GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO., MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED, RBC CAPITAL MARKETS, LLC, AND STEPHENS, INC., Defendants. [PROPOSED] ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEYS FEES AND EXPENSES This matter is before the Court on Lead Counsel s Motion for an Award of Attorneys Fees and Expenses, filed on December 30, 2016 (DE 159). All capitalized terms used herein have the meanings set forth in the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement, dated July 18, 2016 (the Stipulation ), and filed the same day (DE 154). The Court having considered all papers filed and proceedings had herein, having found the Settlement of the Action to be fair, reasonable and adequate, and otherwise being fully informed in the premises and good cause appearing therefore; IT IS HEREBY ORDERS, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that: 1. This Court has jurisdiction to enter this Order. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this Action and all matters relating thereto, and over all Parties to the Action, including all members of the Settlement Class. 2. Pursuant to and in compliance with Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court hereby finds and concludes that due and adequate notice was directed to all Persons and entities who are Settlement Class Members, including individual notice to those Settlement Class
30 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 3 of 4 Members who could be identified through reasonable effort, advising them of Lead Counsel s application for attorneys fees and expenses and of their right to object thereto, and a full and fair opportunity was accorded to Persons and entities who are Settlement Class Members to be heard with respect to Lead Counsel s application for attorneys fees and expenses. The form and method of notifying the Settlement Class of Lead Counsel s application for attorneys fees and expenses met the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, the United States Constitution (including the Due Process Clause), the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 15 U.S.C. 78u- 4(a)(7), and all other applicable law and rules, constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances, and constituted due and sufficient notice to all Persons and entities entitled thereto. 3. Lead Counsel is hereby awarded attorneys fees in the amount of % of the Settlement Fund (which amount includes accrued interest), as well as reimbursment of expenses in the amount of $, which sums the Court finds to be fair and reasonable. The attorneys fees and expenses awarded will be paid to Lead Counsel from the Settlement Fund in accordance with the terms of the Stipulation. 4. In making this award of attorneys fees and expenses to be paid from the Settlement Fund, the Court has considered and found that: (a) The Settlement has created a fund of $20,000,000 in cash that has been funded into an escrow account pursuant to the terms of the Stipulation, and numerous Settlement Class Members who submit valid Proof of Claim Forms will benefit from the Settlement, created by the efforts of Lead Counsel; (b) The Notice was disseminated to over 37,180 putative Settlement Class Members or their nominees stating that Lead Counsel would seek attorneys fees not to exceed 10% of the Settlement Fund, and reimbursement of expenses paid or incurred in connection with the 2
31 Case 9:14-cv DMM Document Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2017 Page 4 of 4 institution, prosecution and resolution of the claims against Defendants, in an amount not to exceed $250,000, and there have been no objections to these requests; (c) The Court is advised that Plaintiffs Counsel have expended more than 4,803 hours in connection with the prosecution and resolution of the Action, with a lodestar value of $2,506, to achieve the Settlement; (d) The Action involves complex factual and legal issues and, in the absence of a settlement, continuing with the claims against Defendants would involve lengthy proceedings whose resolution would be uncertain; (e) Lead Counsel has prosecuted the claims against Defendants for two years and achieved the Settlement with sufficiently skillful and diligent advocacy; (f) (g) The Action was litigated on a purely contingent basis; and The amount of attorneys fees and expenses awarded from the Settlement Fund are fair and reasonable and consistent with awards in similar cases. 5. Any appeal or any challenge affecting this Court s approval of the attorneys fee and expense application shall in no way disturb or affect the finality of the Judgment entered with respect to the Settlement. 6. Jurisdiction is hereby retained over the Parties and the Settlement Class Members for all matters relating to this Action, including the administration, interpretation, effectuation or enforcement of the Stipulation and this Order. 7. The Court directs immediate entry of this Order by the Clerk of the Court. SO ORDERED this day of, The Honorable Donald M. Middlebrooks United States District Judge 3
Case 3:14-cv PGS-LHG Document 130 Filed 05/14/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID: 4283
Case 3:14-cv-05628-PGS-LHG Document 130 Filed 05/14/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID: 4283 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY fl RE COMMVAULT SYSTEMS, inc. SECURITIES LITIGATION Civil Action No.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
4:14-cv-11191-LVP-MKM Doc # 94-2 Filed 11/13/15 Pg 110 of 121 Pg ID 3379 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION Exhibit B NEW YORK STATE TEACHERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM,
More informationCase 1:10-cv ER-SRF Document 844 Filed 11/19/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:10-cv-00990-ER-SRF Document 844 Filed 11/19/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 34967 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE IN RE WILMINGTON TRUST SECURITIES LITIGATION This document relates to:
More information1,=-= := usns son~ 1,.!oocume?~t " LEl'TRONICALLY fl.led i!
Case 1:14-cv-06046-JGK Document 142 Filed 06/28/16 Page 1 of 10 1,=-= :=---- --- 1 usns son~ 1,.!oocuME?~T " LEl'TRONICALLY fl.led i! UNITED STATES DISTRICT COU - \! SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YO OC ~: ---r.:;;t;;.,.---
More informationCase 3:14-cv TJC-JBT Document 173 Filed 10/05/17 Page 1 of 11 PageID 6189
Case 3:14-cv-01395-TJC-JBT Document 173 Filed 10/05/17 Page 1 of 11 PageID 6189 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION In re Rayonier Inc. Securities Litigation Case
More informationCase 5:12-cv SOH Document 457 Filed 04/08/19 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 12296
Case 5:12-cv-05162-SOH Document 457 Filed 04/08/19 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 12296 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION CITY OF PONTIAC GENERAL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
More informationCase 3:14-cv SI Document 240 Filed 11/21/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON
Case 3:14-cv-00367-SI Document 240 Filed 11/21/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON IN RE GALENA BIOPHARMA, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, Case No. 3:14-cv-00367-SI FINAL ORDER
More informationCase 1:15-cv WHP Document 148 Filed 06/28/18 Page 1 of 14
Case 1:15-cv-01249-WHP Document 148 Filed 06/28/18 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE VIRTUS INVESTMENT PARTNERS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION Case No. 15-cv-1249
More informationCase 9:14-cv WPD Document 251 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2017 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 9:14-cv-81156-WPD Document 251 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2017 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA In re: Altisource Portfolio Solutions, S.A. Securities Litigation
More informationGRANTED WITH MODIFICATIONS
GRANTED WITH MODIFICATIONS EFiled: Jan 17 2018 03:59PM EST Transaction ID 61579740 Case No. 12619-CB Exhibit A IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE DREAMWORKS ANIMATION SKG, INC. C.A.
More informationCase 1:12-cv GBD Document 47 Filed 01/19/16 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:12-cv-03879-GBD Document 47 Filed 01/19/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. SECURITIES LITIGATION Master File No. 1: 12-cv-03852-GBD
More informationGRANTED WITH MODIFICATIONS
GRANTED WITH MODIFICATIONS Exhibit A IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE KINDER MORGAN ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P. CAPEX LITIGATION CONSOLIDATED C.A. No. 9318-VCL SCHEDULING ORDER WHEREAS,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE GERSHWIN A. DRAIN
Davidson v. Henkel Corporation et al Doc. 157 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION JOHN B. DAVIDSON, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
More informationCase 4:13-cv YGR Document 126 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-0-ygr Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARK NATHANSON, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. Plaintiffs,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 3:10-cv-04841-FLW-DEA Document 131 Filed 11/21/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID: 2942 Case 3:10 -cv-04841 - ELW- DEA Document 127-1 Filed 11/20/13 Page 1 of 8 PagelD: 2917 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
CASE 0:13-cv-01686-MJD-KMM Document 524 Filed 08/16/18 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA In re MEDTRONIC, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION This Document Relates To: ALL ACTIONS.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
4:14-cv-11191-LVP-MKM Doc # 95 Filed 11/20/15 Pg 1 of 19 Pg ID 3450 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION NEW YORK STATE TEACHERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Individually and
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXA S SHERMAN DIVISION FILE D U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MAR 21200 7 DAVID J. MALANu, t;lerk BY DEPUTY PLA, LLC, individually and on
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 3:14-cv-01982-PGS-TJB Document 132 Filed 11/28/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID: 2750 COHN LIFLAND PEARLMAN HERRMANN & KNOPF LLP PETER S. PEARLMAN JEFFREY W. HERRMANN Park 80 West Plaza One 250 Pehle Avenue,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA IN RE MAXWELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., SECURITIES LITIGATION Case No.: 3:13-cv-00580-BEN-RBB NOTICE OF (I) PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION, CERTIFICATION
More information[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT AND ORDER. into a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement, dated March 11, 2016, as amended on June 13,
Case 1:11-cv-00733-WHP Document 375-1 376 Filed 12/30/16 12/29/16 Page 1 of of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC SCHOOL : CIVIL ACTION NO. EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
More informationIN THE COURT OF COMMON PLfEAS p H. D H lit ui Item 4u.i CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO
]' STUART ROSENBERG Plaintiff 93723077 93723077 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLfEAS p H D H lit ui Item 4u.i CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO Case No: CV-l$fetffift) I U P 2: 0 I lllll it CLIFFS NATURAL RESOURCES INC ET
More informationCase 1:09-cv SAS Document 59-1 Filed 06/28/11 Page 1 of 9 EXHIBIT A
Case 1:09-cv-10087-SAS Document 59-1 Filed 06/28/11 Page 1 of 9 EXHIBIT A Case 1:09-cv-10087-SAS Document 59-1 Filed 06/28/11 Page 2 of 9 BETWEEN EXHIBIT "A" CANADIAN PRE-APPROVAL ORDER ONTARIO SUPERIOR
More informationCase 2:14-cv MCE-KJN Document 87 Filed 07/08/16 Page 1 of 14
Case :-cv-0-mce-kjn Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 LOWENSTEIN SANDLER LLP 0 Lytton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 0 Telephone: --0 Fax: -- Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs Special Situations Fund III QP, L.P. and Special
More informationCase 1:09-cv PAC Document 159 Filed 07/13/15 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:09-cv-01350-PAC Document 159 Filed 07/13/15 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE: 2008 FANNIE MAE ERISA LITIG. 09-CV-01350-PAC MDL No. 2013 NOTICE
More informationCase 1:10-cv ER-SRF Document 825 Filed 07/10/18 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:10-cv-00990-ER-SRF Document 825 Filed 07/10/18 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 33937 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE IN RE WILMINGTON TRUST SECURITIES LITIGATION Master File No. 10-cv-00990-ER
More informationCase 2:14-cv JCC Document 98 Filed 11/24/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
Case :-cv-000-jcc Document Filed // Page of THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 0 KIM BAROVIC, Plaintiff, v. STEVEN A. BALLMER, Defendant.
More informationCase 1:11-cv LAK-JCF Document 285 Filed 01/30/15 Page 1 of 9
Case 1:11-cv-01646-LAK-JCF Document 285 Filed 01/30/15 Page 1 of 9 Case 1:11-cv-01646-LAK-JCF Document 284-1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE
More informationCase 2:06-cv R-CW Document 437 Filed 10/12/12 Page 1 of 11 Page ID #:7705
Case :0-cv-00-R-CW Document Filed // Page of Page ID #:0 0 JOSEPH J. TABACCO, JR. # Email: jtabacco@bermandevalerio.com NICOLE LAVALLEE # Email: nlavallee@bermandevalerio.com BERMAN DeVALERIO One California
More information1:1_ (I f 0 HiIiB} ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE
Case 1:11-cv-07673-KBF Document 176 Filed 05/23/13 Page 1 of 56 USDCSDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #:...,.- SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.DATE FILED: MAY? 1?nt1 IN
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case 2 :11-cv-02794-R-AGR Document 189 Filed 11/12/13 Page 1 of 10 Page ID #:3574 1 JS-6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT
More informationCase3:11-cv EMC Document70 Filed03/06/14 Page1 of 43
Case3:11-cv-03176-EMC Document70 Filed03/06/14 Page1 of 43 Case3:11-cv-03176-EMC Document70 Filed03/06/14 Page2 of 43 Case3:11-cv-03176-EMC Document70 Filed03/06/14 Page3 of 43 Case3:11-cv-03176-EMC Document70
More informationPlaintiff, Defendant. for Denbury Resources, Inc. ("Denbury" or "Defendant") shares pursuant to the merger of
Case 1:10-cv-01917-JG-VVP Document 143 Filed 04/24/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 9369 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ELI BENSINGER, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
More informationCase 1:12-cv RM-KMT Document 239 Filed 03/06/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:12-cv-00292-RM-KMT Document 239 Filed 03/06/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 10 Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-00292-RM-KMT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO In re MOLYCORP, INC.
More informationCase 2:16-cv ADS-AKT Document 24 Filed 06/23/17 Page 1 of 28 PageID #: 161
Case 2:16-cv-05218-ADS-AKT Document 24 Filed 06/23/17 Page 1 of 28 PageID #: 161 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK RICHARD SCALFANI, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY
More informationCase 1:08-cv BSJ-MHD Document 93 Filed 12/05/11 Page 1 of 26 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 1:08-cv-03653-BSJ-MHD Document 93 Filed 12/05/11 Page 1 of 26 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JAMES J HAYES, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
More informationCase 1:12-cv VEC Document 186 Filed 05/27/15 Page 1 of 11. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x
Case 112-cv-01203-VEC Document 186 Filed 05/27/15 Page 1 of 11 CITY OF AUSTIN POLICE RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, vs. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN
More informationSDC SONY DOCUMENT FJCiRONICAU FILED
Case 1:07-cv-10617-LTS Document 61 Filed 04/25/12 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SDC SONY DOCUMENT FJCiRONICAU FILED In re FOCUS MEDIA HOLDING LIMITED LITIGATION
More information[QIJ$&J ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND
Case 1:14-cv-01343-RGA Document 57 Filed 12/22/15 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 873 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE VAMSI ANDAVARAPU, Individually And On Behalf Of All Others Similarly Situated,
More informationIN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
EFiled Feb 20 2017 0339PM EST Transaction ID 60233454 Case No. 11655-VCG Exhibit A IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 3-SIGMA VALUE FINANCIAL OPPORTUNITIES LP, BRH OPPORTUNITIES FEEDER,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO CIV-DIMITROULEAS STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 16-60661-CIV-DIMITROULEAS In re DS Healthcare Group, Inc. Securities Litigation / STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT This Stipulation of Settlement
More informationCase 2:07-cv RAJ Document 87 Filed 03/27/2009 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
Case :0-cv-0-RAJ Document Filed 0//0 Page of The Honorable Richard A. Jones UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 0 IN RE: WSB FINANCIAL GROUP SECURITIES LITIGATION Master
More information4:12-cv GAD-DRG Doc # Filed 09/21/15 Pg 1 of 82 Pg ID 4165 EXHIBIT 2
4:12-cv-14103-GAD-DRG Doc # 149-3 Filed 09/21/15 Pg 1 of 82 Pg ID 4165 EXHIBIT 2 4:12-cv-14103-GAD-DRG Doc # 149-3 Filed 09/21/15 Pg 2 of 82 Pg ID 4166 4:12-cv-14103-GAD-DRG Doc # 149-3 Filed 09/21/15
More information~~_,_ ~~-~ni~i#j~rj I
Case 1:09-cv-00118-VM-FM Document 1457 Filed 11/20/15 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ~~_,_ ~~-~ni~i#j~rj I u:nu ATl\'J!~O'd.L)J 'l J 1 J~'.ll'JO:XXl : " \ (J
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :-md-0-jm-jma Document Filed 0// PageID. Page of 0 0 In re JIFFY LUBE INTERNATIONAL, INC. TEXT SPAM LITIGATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No.: :-MD--JM (JMA
More informationCase 1:09-md BSJ Document 363 Filed 09/13/11 Page 1 of 13. " E' FRO" Cf'LLY FILED DCJ #'^%C' SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: P/
Case 1:09-md-02027-BSJ Document 363 Filed 09/13/11 Page 1 of 13 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT " E' FRO" Cf'LLY FILED DCJ #'^%C' SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: P/ IN RE: SATYAM
More informationA Federal Court authorized this Notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer.
NOTICE OF (I) PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION, CERTIFICATION OF SETTLEMENT CLASS, AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT; (II) SETTLEMENT FAIRNESS HEARING; AND (III) MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF
More informationCase 7:13-cv NSR-LMS Document 132 Filed 11/01/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 7:13-cv-03073-NSR-LMS Document 132 Filed 11/01/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK MICHAEL GOLDEMBERG, ANNIE LE, and HOW ARD PETLACK, on behalf of themselves
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Case 1:12-cv-11044-DJC Document 70-4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 1 of 24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS IN RE MODUSLINK GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION CASE NO. 1:12-CV-11044
More informationCase 1:14-cv JL Document 193 Filed 07/27/18 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Case 1:14-cv-00443-JL Document 193 Filed 07/27/18 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ADAM S. LEVY on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v.
More informationCase 1:11-cv KMW Document 92 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/30/2011 Page 1 of 31 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 1:11-cv-20549-KMW Document 92 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/30/2011 Page 1 of 31 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA SID MURDESHWAR, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
More informationCase Case 1:10-cv AKH Document Document Filed 03/16/15 03/13/15 Page 11of9
Case Case 1:10-cv-03864-AKH Document Document 476-1 479 Filed 03/16/15 03/13/15 Page 11of9 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~X MARY K. JONES, Individually and
More informationCase 1:15-cv MGC Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/18/2017 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 1:15-cv-22782-MGC Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/18/2017 Page 1 of 9 BENJAMIN FERNANDEZ, et. al., vs. Plaintiffs, MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED, UNITED STATES DISTRICT
More informationCase 1:04-cv DAB Document 569 Filed 12/02/10 Page 1 of 8 SOUTHERN DISTIUCT OF NEW YORK..
II I Case 1:04-cv-08141-DAB Document 569 Filed 12/02/10 Page 1 of 8 Case 1 :04-cv-OS141-DAB Document 543-1 Filed 05/17/10 Pa e 1 of S - ---... USDC SDN"t ----I;, DOctllrffiNT! UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
More informationPLAINTIFF S EXHIBIT 1
PLAINTIFF S EXHIBIT 1 In The Case Of Kevin Burkhammer, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. Allied Interstate LLC; and, Does 1-20, Inclusive, 15CV0567 KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IOC SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YOR. This matter came before the Court for hearing pursuant to this Court's Order Granting
ase L 6v v (E-ea s e 1: 1 6R P_)-dRK DOCUM DocuemnjT2 4 F, Ie&W/2V71& FP a72 1 OF 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IOC SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YOR IN RE ELETROBRAS SECURITIES LITIGATION Case No.: 15-cv-5754-JGK
More informationFINALLY CERTIFYING A CLASS
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SHAWNEE COUNTY, KANSAS DIVISION 12 In re KINDER MORGAN, INC. SHAREHOLDERS LITIGATION (This Order Relates to All Actions.) Consolidated Case No. 06-C-801 ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING
More informationthe terms and conditions of the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement with Certain Defendant s
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT LOUISVILLE CIVIL ACTION NO. 3 :99CV-539- H IN RE: ARM FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT On July 12, 2005,
More informationJUDGMENT APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND DISMISSING ACTION AGAINST BERNARD EBBERS. On this day of, 2005, a hearing having been held before this Court to
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE WORLDCOM, INC. : MASTER FILE NO. SECURITIES LITIGATION : 02 Civ. 3288 (DLC) : : This Document Relates to: : : 02 Civ. 3288 02 Civ. 4973
More informationCase 1:12-cv JSR Document 63 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 13
---~------------------ Case 1:12-cv-09456-JSR Document 63 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE SILVERCORP METALS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION Case
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE
Case: 1:12-cv-00276 Document #: 113 Filed: 11/06/13 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:2694 2c THURMAN ROSS, by and on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN
More information[~DJ FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
Case 1:11-cv-08066-JGK Document 130 Filed 07/24/15 Page 1 of 11 Case 1:11-cv-08066-JGK Document 108-6 Filed 12/17/14 Page 2 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK OKLAHOMA POLICE
More informationCase 3:11-md DMS-RBB Document 108 Filed 12/18/12 Page 1 of 12
Case :-md-0-dms-rbb Document 0 Filed // Page of 0 0 In re GROUPON MARKETING AND SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA No. :-md-0-dms-rbb ORDER APPROVING
More informationCase 1:14-cv JBW-LB Document 116 Filed 04/05/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: CV-1 199
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE U.S. DISTRICT C'URT E.D.WX. Case 1:14-cv-01199-JBW-LB Document 116 Filed 04/05/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1535 * APR 052016
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNI A SAN JOSE DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNI A SAN JOSE DIVISION In re McKESSON HBOC, INC. Master File No. -CV-0 RMW (PVT) SECURITIES LITIGATION And Related Cases CLASS ACTION This Document
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
Case 1:14-cv-01599-TWP-DML Document 98 Filed 11/04/15 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1307 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION In re ITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC. CASE
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CLASS ACTION
Case 1:10-cv-00479-EJL -CWD Document 81 Filed 10/05/11 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO LESLIE NIEDERKLEIN, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA SAMCO PARTNERS, on Behalf of Itself and All Others Similarly Situated, vs. Plaintiff, JOSEPH M. O DONNELL, EDWARD
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 14-CIV-81057-WPD IN RE OCWEN FINANCIAL CORPORATION SECURITIES LITIGATION NOTICE OF (I) PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION; (II)
More informationCase 2:15-cv LDD Document 54 Filed 12/12/16 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 2:15-cv-01243-LDD Document 54 Filed 12/12/16 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JANELL MOORE, et al. : CIVIL ACTION on behalf of themselves and
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION CLASS ACTION
8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION PACHOLDER HIGH YIELD FUND, INC., ) COPERNICUS EURO CDO-I B.V., ) TOPSAIL CBO, LTD., TCW LINC III ) CBO, LTD.,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION HENRY LACE on behalf of himself ) and all others similarly situated, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) Case No. 3:12-CV-00363-JD-CAN ) v. )
More informationUNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO CIV-DIMITROULEAS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT
JOSEPH AND PATRICIA MARRARI, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, vs. Plaintiffs, MEDICAL STAFFING NETWORK HOLDINGS, INC., et al., Defendants. UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN
More informationCOURT Case 2 : 04-cv RC Document 264 Filed 11/08 /20 NOV ^ [CENL-7'^AL
Case 2 : 04-cv-06180 -RC Document 264 Filed 11/08 /20 q@.^1wa7ict COURT NOV ^ 8 2007 [CENL-7'^AL CT F CALIFORNIA DEPUTY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION Case
More informationCase: 1: 1 0-cv Document #: 77 Filed: 03/22/11 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:569
Case: 1: 1 0-cv-01 937 Document #: 77 Filed: 03/22/11 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:569 STEVE CROTTEAU, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT
More informationCase 3:13-cv HSG Document Filed 03/17/16 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Case :-cv-00-hsg Document - Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION PATRICK HENDRICKS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION. No. 3:15-cv EMC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION IN RE ENERGY RECOVERY, INC., SECURITIES LITIGATION No. 3:15-cv-00265-EMC NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF
More informationCase 4:02-cv SPF-FHM Document 1550 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 10/05/2006 Page 1 of 12
Case 4:02-cv-00072-SPF-FHM Document 1550 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 10/05/2006 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA IN RE WILLIAMS SECURITIES LITIGATION This Document
More informationCase 8:14-cv JSM-CPT Document 313 Filed 12/13/18 Page 1 of 5 PageID 5935
Case 8:14-cv-02327-JSM-CPT Document 313 Filed 12/13/18 Page 1 of 5 PageID 5935 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION MARISELA HERRERA and NICOLAS ACOSTA,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
EXHIBIT C UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) IN RE ING GROEP, N.V. ) ERISA LITIGATION ) ) ) THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ) All Actions ) ) MASTER FILE NO. 1:09-CV-00400-JEC
More informationCase 1:13-cv WHP Document 571 Filed 06/02/16 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 1:13-cv-06802-WHP Document 571 Filed 06/02/16 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK THE DIAL CORPORATION, et al., Individually and on behalf of Similarly Situated
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Master File No. 05-CV H(RBB) CLASS ACTION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA In re PETCO CORPORATION SECURITIES LITIGATION Master File No. 05-CV-0823- H(RBB) CLASS ACTION This Document Relates To: ALL ACTIONS. NOTICE
More informationNOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF STOCKHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION
DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF DOUGLAS, COLORADO 4000 Justice Way, Suite 2009 Castle Rock, CO 80109 IN RE ADVANCED EMISSIONS SOLUTIONS, INC. SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION This Document Relates to: ALL ACTIONS
More informationSTIPULATION AND AGREEMENT OF SETTLEMENT. This Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement, dated as of December 18, 2015 (the
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. SECURITIES LITIGATION Master File No. 1:12-cv-03852-GBD STIPULATION AND AGREEMENT OF SETTLEMENT This Stipulation and
More informationCase 1:16-cv JFM Document 18-4 Filed 06/30/17 Page 1 of 77 EXHIBIT 1
Case 1:16-cv-03282-JFM Document 18-4 Filed 06/30/17 Page 1 of 77 EXHIBIT 1 Case 1:16-cv-03282-JFM Document 18-4 Filed 06/30/17 Page 2 of 77 EXECUTION COPY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. Plaintiff, Case No CA XXXX MB AO
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA MICHAEL BLOCH, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, v. Plaintiff, Case No. 50 2009 CA 025312 XXXX
More information#0 I. ! l>a TE FILE ~ V 1 Q r USDC ~DNY, DOCU'.\'IENT I FLF.CTRO:\ICALLY FILED I I DOC#:
Case 1:12-cv-02865-KBF Document 296 Filed 11/10/14 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK POLICEMEN'S ANNUITY AND BENEFIT FUND OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO et al., - against
More informationCase 0:13-cv MGC Document 77-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/15/2015 Page 1 of 55 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE
Case 0:13-cv-61747-MGC Document 77-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/15/2015 Page 1 of 55 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE This Settlement Agreement and Release (the Agreement or Settlement ) is made by and
More informationCase 1:15-cv JFK Document 114 Filed 11/05/18 Page 1 of 12 Case 1:15-cv JFK Document Filed 10/30/18 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:15-cv-06369-JFK Document 114 Filed 11/05/18 Page 1 of 12 Case 1:15-cv-06369-JFK Document 109-3 Filed 10/30/18 Page 2 of 13 Exhibit C UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT
Case 1:11-cv-02400-RWS Document 72-5 Filed 01/27/14 Page 1 of 93 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) CIVIL ACTION NO. IN RE: EBIX, INC. ) SECURITIES LITIGATION
More informationCase 2:12-cv VEH Document 110 Filed 07/15/15 Page 1 of 50 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 2:12-cv-00829-VEH Document 110 Filed 07/15/15 Page 1 of 50 FILED 2015 Jul-15 PM 04:21 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION
More informationCase5:10-cv RMW Document207 Filed03/11/14 Page1 of 7
Case:0-cv-0-RMW Document0 Filed0// Page of Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. ) Roger N. Heller (State Bar No. ) LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP Battery Street, th Floor San Francisco, CA - Telephone:
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-00-dms-jlb Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DENNIS PETERSEN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiff, CJ
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURIAA WESTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURIAA WESTERN DIVISION MICHAEL P. AND SHELLIE GILMOR, ET AL., vs. Plaintiffs, Case No. 10-0189-CV-W-ODS PREFERRED CREDIT CORPORATION,
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN MATEO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
JOE M. WILEY, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, vs. ENVIVIO, INC., et al., SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Plaintiff, Defendants. Master File No.
More informationNOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DAREN LEVIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, Case No. 1:15-cv-07081-LLS Hon. Louis L. Stanton v. RESOURCE
More informationCase 4:16-cv HSG Document 33-1 Filed 11/16/16 Page 16 of 66 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE
Case :-cv-00-hsg Document - Filed // Page of 0 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE This Settlement Agreement and Release and its attached exhibits ( Settlement Agreement or Agreement ), is entered into by
More informationCase: 1:15-cv Document #: 169 Filed: 12/01/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:2786
Case: 1:15-cv-01944 Document #: 169 Filed: 12/01/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:2786 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION IN RE AKORN, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION Case No.
More informationNOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE ACTION AND SETTLEMENT HEARING
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY IN RE RAYTHEON COMPANY SHAREHOLDERS LITIGATION CONSOLIDATED C.A. NO. 19018 NC NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF SHAREHOLDER
More information