Case: 4:14-cv ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 1 of 9 PageID #: 523. Case No.: 4:14-cv-00159

Similar documents
Case 1:14-cv PJK-GBW Document 59 Filed 04/21/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

Case 3:17-cv JAG Document 41 Filed 02/21/18 Page 1 of 8 PageID# 258

Case: 4:16-cv ERW Doc. #: 95 Filed: 12/15/17 Page: 1 of 10 PageID #: 734

Case 3:14-cv JAG Document 193 Filed 01/30/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID# 4730 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 576 Filed: 07/06/17 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:22601

Case: 1:15-cv Document #: 47 Filed: 10/11/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:299

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 52 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:463

Case: 2:13-cv CMV Doc #: 86 Filed: 07/13/18 Page: 1 of 9 PAGEID #: 606 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 382 Filed: 03/08/18 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:7778

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 117 Filed: 08/12/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:706

Case: 4:16-cv JAR Doc. #: 97 Filed: 12/13/18 Page: 1 of 10 PageID #: 2279

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SUSAN DOHERTY and DWIGHT SIMONSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. l:10-cv nlh-kmw

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE

Case 7:12-cv VB Document 109 Filed 08/01/14 Page 1 of 9

Case: 1:14-cv Document #: 58 Filed: 11/10/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:314

Case 6:05-cv ACC-DAB Document 56 Filed 01/12/2007 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

Case 1:17-cv WTL-MPB Document 72 Filed 10/10/18 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 736

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

Case 2:17-cv JFB-SIL Document 16 Filed 07/14/17 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 71

Case: 1:06-cv Document #: 771 Filed: 03/15/19 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:28511

\ 'C,_ \) ~THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

Case 2:11-cv JLL-MAH Document 69 Filed 02/22/13 Page 1 of 11 PageID: 739

[QIJ$&J ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND

Case 2:17-cv JS Document 59 Filed 05/10/18 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:14-cv VEC Document 259 Filed 01/24/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, DIRECTING NOTICE, AND SCHEDULING FINAL APPROVAL HEARING

Case 1:09-cv RB-RHS Document 139 Filed 11/01/13 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

2:14-cv CAS-JEM Document 38 Filed 04/27/15 Page 1 of 11 Page ID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


CIV CIV DS MISC ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AND FINAL JUDGMENT filed

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. ORDER This matter came before the Court on the Plaintiffs Motion for Modification of

Case 1:17-cv AT Document 77 Filed 09/14/18 Page 1 of 12

Case 1:14-cv MGC Document 155 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/11/2016 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 9:15-cv KAM Document 167 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/19/2017 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 0:13-cv JIC Document 318 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/30/2016 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case: 4:16-cv ERW Doc. #: 105 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 1 of 10 PageID #: 915

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 4:06-cv CW Document 81 Filed 03/25/2008 Page 1 of 10

Case 2:17-cv GAM Document 56 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 1:13-cv KMW Document 37 Filed 02/19/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID: 240

Plaintiff, Defendant. for Denbury Resources, Inc. ("Denbury" or "Defendant") shares pursuant to the merger of

Case 2:03-cv RCJ-PAL Document 2907 Filed 06/05/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case: 1:15-cv Document #: 169 Filed: 12/01/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:2786

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

Case 8:11-cv JST-JPR Document Filed 08/16/13 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:5240

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

Case 1:12-cv VEC Document 186 Filed 05/27/15 Page 1 of 11. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 2:08-cv SHM-dkv Document 327 Filed 06/23/14 Page 1 of 23 PageID 8969

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. Plaintiff, j Judge: Hon. Joan M. Lewis ) ) )

Case: 2:13-cv CMV Doc #: 92 Filed: 11/14/18 Page: 1 of 6 PAGEID #: 812 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 4:13-cv AWA-LRL Document Filed 11/21/16 Page 1 of 7 PageID# 4099

Case 1:15-cv ELR Document 60 Filed 09/08/16 Page 1 of 21

Case 1:14-cv SMG Document 68 Filed 09/19/17 Page 1 of 29 PageID #: 1270

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

mg Doc 4808 Filed 08/23/13 Entered 08/23/13 08:51:55 Main Document Pg 1 of 12

Case 7:16-cv KMK Document 75 Filed 10/17/17 Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS PEORIA DIVISION : : : : : : : : : : : :

Case 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 1:15-cv RWS Document 45-2 Filed 08/11/16 Page 7 of 74

Case 2:16-cv SGC Document 1 Filed 12/15/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 7:15-cv AT-LMS Document 129 Filed 05/04/18 Page 1 of 8

Case 2:15-cv JMA-SIL Document 34 Filed 02/22/16 Page 1 of 19 PageID #: 221 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 5:05-cv RMW Document 97 Filed 08/08/2007 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Case: 1:14-cv Document #: 266 Filed: 10/05/17 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:5588

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. Richmond Division

Case: 4:14-md RWS Doc. #: 164 Filed: 12/18/15 Page: 1 of 8 PageID #: 1284

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 88 Filed: 07/06/18 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:1135

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:18-cv RJC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. TJ H Case No. 5:15-cv ~jc~-gjs

Case3:14-cv VC Document45 Filed01/12/15 Page1 of 43

Case 1:11-md SM Document 242 Filed 01/02/19 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE (ALL CASES)

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI, AT INDEPENDENCE

BEFORE THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION

Case 1:15-cv NRB Document 243 Filed 09/26/17 Page 1 of 14. Case 1:15-cv NRB Document Filed 09/19/17 Page 1of14

Case 9:18-cv RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2018 Page 1 of 10. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No.

Case 1:14-cv PAC Document 94 Filed 08/29/17 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:17-cv JPO Document 47 Filed 05/23/18 Page 1 of 5

2:12-cv MOB-MKM Doc # 91 Filed 05/16/14 Pg 1 of 22 Pg ID 1109

Case 1:11-cv NLH-KMW Document 19 Filed 06/01/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID: 196 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SHARON COBB, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,,

Case 2:16-cv JMA-SIL Document 5 Filed 12/27/16 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 88 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

: 04 MD 1653 (LAK) CORRECTED ORDER CONCERNING PROPOSED SETTLEMENT WITH DEFENDANT BNL AND THE CREDIT SUISSE DEFENDANTS

Case 3:18-cv RV-CJK Document 1 Filed 02/02/18 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. Civil Case Number:

Case 2:14-cv Document 1166 Filed 09/21/17 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 38972

Woods et al v. Vector Marketing Corporation Doc. 276 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 9:18-cv RLR Document 27 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/28/2018 Page 1 of 13

Case 4:17-cv ALM Document 42-1 Filed 04/03/18 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 337

Case 3:09-cv JPG-PMF Document 47 Filed 01/11/11 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #466

Case 8:17-cv CEH-JSS Document 1 Filed 08/09/17 Page 1 of 14 PageID 1

Case 1:16-cv TSE-TCB Document 114 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID# 1372

Transcription:

Case: 4:14-cv-00159-ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 1 of 9 PageID #: 523 UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION JOHN PRATER, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Case No.: 4:14-cv-00159 Plaintiff, vs. MEDICREDIT, INC. and THE OUTSOURCE : GROUP, INC.,. Defendants. ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING CLASS SETTLEMENT The Court has been advised that the parties to this action, John Prater (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff' or "Class Representative"), Medicredit, Inc. and The Outsource Group, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Defendants"), and Intervenor ClearLight Partners, LLC, through their respective counsel, have agreed, subject to Court approval following notice to the Class Members and a hearing, to settle the above-captioned lawsuit upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Class Action Settlement Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the "Settlement Agreement"), which has been filed with the Court, and the Court deeming that the definitions set forth in the Settlement Agreement are hereby incorporated by reference herein (with capitalized terms as set forth in the Settlement Agreement); NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the Settlement Agreement and all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, and it appearing to the Court that, upon preliminary examination, the proposed settlement appears fair, reasonable, and adequate, and that a hearing should and will be held on December 7, 2015, after Notice to the Class Members, to confirm that the proposed 1

Case: 4:14-cv-00159-ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 2 of 9 PageID #: 524 settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate, and to determine whether a final order and judgment should be entered in this Lawsuit: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action and over all settling parties hereto. 2. In compliance with the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. 1332(d), 1453, and 1711-1715, Defendants served written Notice of the proposed class settlement on the United States Attorney General and the Attorneys General of each state. 3. CLASS MEMBERS- Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3), this action is hereby preliminarily certified, for settlement purposes only, as a class action on behalf of the following class of plaintiffs (referred to as the "Class Members") with respect to the claims asserted in this action: All persons and entities throughout the United States (1) to whom Medicredit, Inc. and/or The Outsource Group, Inc. made or caused to be made one or more telephone calls, (2) directed to a number assigned at the time of the call(s) to a cellular telephone service (whether the number was assigned to the person receiving the call or not), (3) by using an automatic telephone dialing system and/or an artificial or prerecorded voice, (4) from January 28, 2010 through and including the date of the Preliminary Approval Order, and (5) for whom Medicredit, Inc., The Outsource Group, Inc. and/or the Released Parties did not have a valid consent for such call or calls at the time thereof. 4. CLASS REPRESENTATIVE AND CLASS COUNSEL APPOINTMENT - Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, the Court preliminarily appoints John Prater as the Class Representative and Michael L. Greenwald, James L. Davidson, and Aaron D. Radbil of Greenwald Davidson Radbil PLLC as Class Counsel. See Jones v. IQ. Data Int'/, Inc., Case 1:14-cv-00130-PJK-GBW, 2015 WL 2088969, at *2 (D.N.M. Apr. 21, 2015) (appointing Greenwald Davidson Radbil PLLC as class counsel in TCPA class action); Ritchie v. Van Ru Credit Corp., No. 2:12-CV-01714-PHX-SM, 2014 WL 3955268, at *2 (D. Ariz. Aug. 13, 2014) 2

Case: 4:14-cv-00159-ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 3 of 9 PageID #: 525 (same); see also Rhodes v. Olson Associates, P.C. dlb/a Olson Shaner, --- F. Supp. 3d ----, 2015 WL 1136176, at* 14 (D. Colo. Mar. 13, 2015) (appointing Greenwald Davidson Radbil as class counsel); Roundtree v. Bush Ross, P.A., 304 F.R.D 644, 661 (M.D. Fla. 2015) (same); Esposito v. Deatrick & Spies, P.S.C., No. 7:13-CV-1416 GLS/TWD, 2015 WL 390392, at *2 (N.D.N.Y. Jan. 28, 2015) (same); Green v. Dressman Benzinger Lavelle, PSC, No. 1:14-CV-00142-SJD, 2015 WL 223764, at *2 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 16, 2015) (same); Donnelly v. EquityExperts.org, LLC, No. 4:13-CV-10017-TGB, 2015 WL 249522, at *2 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 14, 2015) (same). 5. PRELIMINARY CLASS CERTIFICATION - The Court preliminarily finds that this action satisfies the applicable prerequisites for class action treatment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, namely: A. The Class Members are so numerous and geographically dispersed that joinder of all of them is impracticable; B. There are questions of law and fact common to the Class Members, which predominate over any individual questions; C. The claims of the Plaintiff are typical of the claims of the Class Members; D. The Plaintiff and Class Counsel have fairly and adequately represented and protected the interests of all of the Class Members; and E. Class treatment of these claims will be efficient and manageable, thereby achieving an appreciable measure of judicial economy, and a class action is superior to other available methods for a fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy. See St. Louis Heart Center, Inc. v. Vein Centers for Excellence, Inc., No. 4:12 CV 174 CDP, 2013 WL 6498245 (E.D. Mo. Dec. 11, 2013). 3

Case: 4:14-cv-00159-ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 4 of 9 PageID #: 526 6. The Court preliminarily finds that the settlement of this action, on the terms and conditions set forth in the Settlement Agreement, is in all respects fundamentally fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best interest of the Class Members, especially in light of the benefits to the Class Members; the strengths and weaknesses of the Plaintiffs case, including the defenses asserted by Defendants; the complexity, expense, and probable duration of further litigation; the risk and delay inherent in possible appeals; and the risk of collecting any judgment obtained on behalf of the class. See In re Wireless Tel. Fed. Cost Recovery Fees Litig., 396 F.3d 922, 931 (8th Cir. 2005) (setting forth factors to determine whether settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate). 7. ADMINISTRATION -A third party class administrator acceptable to the parties will administer the settlement and notification to Class Members. The class administrator will be responsible for mailing the approved class action notice and settlement checks to the Class Members who can be identified through reasonable efforts. All costs of administration will be paid out of the Settlement Fund. Upon the recommendation of the parties, the Court hereby appoints the following class administrator: KCC Class Action Services, LLC, P.O. Box 6191, Novato, CA 94948. 8. WRITTEN NOTICE- The Court approves the form and substance of the postcard notice and Question & Answer Notice, attached to the Settlement Agreement as Exhibits A and B. The proposed form and method for notifying the 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 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 Class Members of their rights. In accordance 4

Case: 4:14-cv-00159-ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 5 of 9 PageID #: 527 with the Settlement Agreement, the class administrator will cause the postcard notice to be mailed to the Class Members as expeditiously as possible, but in no event later than 30 days after the Court's entry of this order, i.e., no later than August 12, 2015. The class administrator will confirm, and if necessary, update the addresses for the Class Members through standard methodology that the class administrator uses to update addresses. In addition, the Question & Answer Notice, and relevant pleadings, will be made available to Class Members through a dedicated web site. 9. EXCLUSIONS- Any Class Member who desires to be excluded from the class must send a written request for exclusion to the class administrator with a postmark date no later than 107 days after the Court's entry of this order, i.e., no later than October 29, 2015. To be effective, the written request for exclusion must state the Class Member's full name, address, telephone number, and email address (if available), along with a statement that the Class Member wishes to be excluded. Any Class Member who submits a valid and timely request for exclusion shall not be bound by the terms of the Settlement Agreement. l 0. OBJECTIONS - Any Class Member who intends to object to the fairness of this settlement must file a written objection with the Court within l 07 days after the Court's entry of this order, i.e., no later than October 29, 2015. Further, any such Class Member must, within the same time period, provide a copy of the written objection to Class Counsel, Attention: Prater v. Medicredit, Inc. Settlement, Greenwald Davidson Radbil PLLC, 5550 Glades Road, Suite 500, Boca Raton, FL 33431; Counsel for Defendants, Attention: Prater v. Medicredit, Inc. Settlement, Lathrop & Gage LLP, 7701 Forsyth Blvd., Suite 500, Clayton, MO 63105; and Counsel for Intervenor, Attention: Mark S. Mester, Latham & Watkins LLP, 330 North Wabash Avenue, Suite 2800, Chicago, Illinois 60611. 5

Case: 4:14-cv-00159-ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 6 of 9 PageID #: 528 11. To be effective, a notice of intent to object to the proposed settlement must: A. Contain a heading which includes the name of the case and case number; B. Provide the name, address, telephone number and signature of the Class Member filing the objection; C. Provide evidence demonstrating that the Class Member 1s indeed a member of the Class; D. Be filed with the Clerk of the Court no later than 100 days after the Court preliminarily approves the settlement; E. Be sent to Class Counsel, Defendants and Intervenor at the addresses designated in the Notice by first-class mail, postmarked no later than 100 days after the Court preliminarily approves the settlement; F. Contain the name, address, bar number and telephone number of the objecting Class Member's counsel, if represented by an attorney. If the Class Member is represented by an attorney, he/she must comply with all applicable laws and rules for filing pleadings and documents in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. G. Contain a detailed statement of the specific legal and factual basis for each and every objection; and H. Contain a list of any legal authority the objector will present at the settlement approval hearing. 12. Any Class Member who has timely filed an objection must appear at the settlement approval hearing, in person or by counsel, and be heard to the extent allowed by the Court, applying applicable law, in opposition to the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of the 6

Case: 4:14-cv-00159-ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 7 of 9 PageID #: 529 proposed settlement, and on the application for an award of attorneys' fees and costs. The right to object to the proposed settlement must be exercised individually by an individual Class Member, not as a member of a group or subclass and, except in the case of a deceased, minor, or incapacitated Class Member, not by the act of another person acting or purporting to act in a representative capacity. 13. The Court orders that any member of the Settlement Class who does not submit a timely, written request for exclusion from the Settlement Class (i.e., becomes an Opt Out) will be bound by all proceedings, orders and judgments in this litigation, even if such member of the Settlement Class has previously initiated or subsequently initiates individual litigation or other proceedings encompassed by the Release. 14. SETTLEMENT PAYMENTS - The class administrator will mail a settlement check to each Class Member who submits a timely claim form and does not exclude himself or herself from the class. The settlement checks to the class members shall be sent via U.S. mail no later than 60 days after the judgment in this case becomes final. 15. CLASS REPRESENTATIVE AWARD TO JOHN PRATER- John Prater will petition the Court to receive the sum of $20,000 as acknowledgement of his role in prosecuting this case on behalf of the Class Members. 16. INJUNCTION - Pending determination of whether final approval of the Settlement Agreement should be granted, the Court enjoins Plaintiff and all members of the Settlement Class unless and until they have timely excluded themselves from (a) filing, commencing, prosecuting, intervening in or participating as a plaintiff, claimant or class member in any other lawsuit, arbitration or other proceeding in any jurisdiction based on, relating to or arising out of the claims and causes of action and/or the facts and circumstances giving rise to 7

Case: 4:14-cv-00159-ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 8 of 9 PageID #: 530 the Litigation and/or the Released Claims, (b) filing, commencing or prosecuting a lawsuit, arbitration or other proceeding as a class action on behalf of any members of the Settlement Class who have not timely excluded themselves (including by seeking to amend a pending Complaint to include class allegations or seeking class certification in a pending action), based on, relating to or arising out of the claims and causes of action and/or the facts and circumstances giving rise to the Litigation and/ or the Released Claims and ( c) attempting to effect Opt Outs of a class of individuals in any lawsuit or arbitration proceeding based on, relating to or arising out of the claims and causes of action and/or the facts and circumstances giving rise to the Litigation and/or the Released Claims, except that Settlement Class Members are not precluded from participating in any investigation or suit initiated by a state or federal agency. 17. FINAL APPROVAL - The Court will conduct a hearing (hereinafter referred to as the "final approval hearing") on December 7, 2015 at United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse, 111 South 10th Street, St. Louis, MO 63102, to review and rule upon the following issues: A. Whether this action satisfies the applicable requirements for class action treatment for settlement purposes under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23; B. Whether the proposed settlement is fundamentally fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best interest of the Class Members and should be approved by the Court; C. Whether the final order and judgment, as provided under the Settlement Agreement, should be entered, dismissing this action with prejudice and releasing the Released Claims against the Released Parties; and D. To discuss and review other issues as the Court deems appropriate. 8

Case: 4:14-cv-00159-ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 9 of 9 PageID #: 531 18. Attendance at the Final Approval Hearing is not necessary. Class Members need not appear at the hearing or take any other action to indicate their approval of the proposed class action settlement. Class Members wishing to be heard are, however, required to appear at the final approval hearing. The final approval hearing may be postponed, adjourned, transferred, or continued without further notice to the Class Members. 19. Submissions by the Parties, including memoranda in support of the proposed settlement, responses to any objections, petitions for attorney's fees and reimbursement of costs and expenses by Class Counsel, shall be filed with the Court no later than 21 days prior to the final approval hearing, i.e., no later than November 16, 2015. 20. The Court retains continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over the action to consider all further matters arising out of or connected with the settlement, including the administration and enforcement of the Settlement Agreement. 21. The Court sets the following schedule: Date July 13, 2015 August 19, 2015 October 28, 2015 November 16, 2015 December 7, 2015 Event Preliminary Approval Order Entered Notice Sent Deadline to Send Exclusion or File Objection Motion for Final Approval and Attorney Fees Papers Filed Final Approval Hearing Held IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated:~ /3 '2015. The Hono bber Senior United States District Court Judge 9