You're viewing Docket Item 54 from the case Paige Cooperman v. Galeos LLC. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




Case 8:10-cv-01815-JVS -FFM Document 54 Filed 02/28/12 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:1121

Mark L. Eisenhut, Bar No. 185039
Ryan M. McNamara, Bar No. 223606
Aaron L. Renfro, Bar No. 255086
CALL & JENSEN
A Professional Corporation
610 Newport Center Drive, Suite 700
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Tel:
(949) 717-3000
Fax: (949) 717-3100
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Attorneys for Defendants Galeos, LLC, Galeos, Inc.,
Andrei Leontieff and Gordana Samardzic



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA







1

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














Case No. SACV 10-01815 JVS (FFMx)
(Consolidated with SACV 11-14 JVS
(FFMx) and SACV 11-240 JVS (FFMx))

FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT

Complaint Filed: 11/29/2010
Trial Date: None Set




PAIGE COOPERMAN, MEREDITH
WORTHY, GWEN FRAZIER, MERLE
LEVY, ALTARA MICHELLE, GINA
SALTONSTALL, and JUDY RUTTER,
each individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated,


Plaintiffs,

vs.


GALEOS, LLC, GALEOS, INC.,
ANDREI LEONTIEFF, GORDANA
SAMARDZIC, and unidentified entities
A through Z,


Defendants.

FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT

- 1 -



Case 8:10-cv-01815-JVS -FFM Document 54 Filed 02/28/12 Page 2 of 5 Page ID #:1122





1

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





Having considered the Joint Motion for Final Approval of Class
Settlement, the amended Settlement Agreement and Release (“Settlement Agreement”)
dated January 30, 2012,1 the Notice of Settlement Regarding Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
dated February 24, 2012, and all other papers submitted to the Court and proceedings to
date, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:



1.

A class action complaint was filed by Paige Cooperman and several
other Plaintiffs on November 29, 2010. The complaint was subsequently amended on
December 17, 2010 and February 14, 2011. In the following months, several other class
action lawsuits based upon the same facts and circumstances were filed.

2.

Plaintiffs, the class as defined in the Settlement Agreement, and
Defendants have been represented in the action by experienced and qualified attorneys.
Defendants contest each and every claim alleged by Plaintiffs in the
action, and also deny and continue to deny any wrongdoing or legal liability arising out
of any conduct alleged in the action. Defendants are prepared to defend the action.

3.

4.

Following investigation, discovery, and arms-length negotiations
with respect to the merits of each side’s claims and defenses, the Parties reached a
settlement of the action embodied in the Settlement Agreement.

5.

For purposes of the settlement, the Settlement Class as defined in the
Settlement Agreement is an ascertainable class with a well-defined community of
interest, within the meaning of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.

6.

The form and method of providing notice to class members specified
in Section VI of the Settlement Agreement is reasonably calculated to apprise class
members of (i) the pending lawsuit; (ii) the proposed settlement, (iii) their rights,
including the right to participate in the settlement, the right to opt for exclusion from the
class and settlement and the right to object to the settlement, and (iv) the manner of
exercising those rights.


1 All capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meaning attributed to that term in the
Settlement Agreement.



FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT

- 2 -



Case 8:10-cv-01815-JVS -FFM Document 54 Filed 02/28/12 Page 3 of 5 Page ID #:1123





1

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





7.

The process for requesting refunds, the allowance of refunds
themselves, and the amount of the incentive awards to Representative Class Members
are fair, reasonable, and adequate to members of the Settlement Class.

8.

The settlement represents a fair and reasonable compromise of the
Parties’ interests in light of the size of the class, amounts of the claims, and hurdles
faced by Plaintiffs in certifying a class and prevailing on the merits through continued
litigation.

9.

Final approval of the settlement is granted on the terms of the
Settlement Agreement filed herewith. The Court finds that the settlement is fair,
reasonable, and adequate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e).

10. The Court finds that the notice procedures followed by Defendants

are adequate and fully comply with due process requirements.

11. A class should be certified for settlement purposes only to carry out

the terms and provisions of the Settlement Agreement.

12. The Court finds that all class members who did not timely opt out of
the class and this settlement are bound by the settlement and are permanently barred
from prosecuting any of the claims released in the Settlement Agreement, and that all
class members who have not opted out have waived their right to appeal.
/ / /
FOR GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:

1.

Final Approval. The Settlement Agreement is hereby approved as

fair, reasonable, and adequate, and the Parties shall implement it pursuant to its terms.

2.

Certification of Settlement Class. For good cause shown, the Court
concludes that the Settlement Class satisfies the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 23 and is certified for settlement purposes only, as specified in the Settlement
Agreement, consisting of:



All United States citizens that purchased one or more Galeos
Products, for personal use and not for resale, during the Class



FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT

- 3 -



Case 8:10-cv-01815-JVS -FFM Document 54 Filed 02/28/12 Page 4 of 5 Page ID #:1124





1

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





Period. Excluded from the Class are (a) all persons who
validly opt out of the settlement in a timely manner; (b)
counsel of record (and their respective law firms) for the
parties; (c) Defendants; (d) any entities in which Defendants
have or had a controlling interest; (e) any officer or director of
Defendants; (f) the legal representatives, heirs, successors,
and assigns of Defendants; (g) any Judge assigned to these
Actions and his or her immediate family.
3.

Approval of Class Compensation. The Court concludes that the
refunds to be distributed to the Settlement Class along with the measures to ensure that
Galeos’ products maintain accuracy and consistency in labeling are fair and reasonable
and shall be and are hereby approved.

4.

Appointment of Class Counsel. The Court appoints Carey, Danis &

Lowe and Paris Ackerman & Schmierer LLP as counsel for the class.

5.

Class Representatives and Approval of Enhancement. Each of the
Representative Plaintiffs, Paige Cooperman, Meredith Worthy, Gwen Frazier, Merle
Levy, Altara Michelle, Gina Saltonstall, Judy Rutter, Hillary Goldberg, Frances Healey,
Debra Kerper, Gabriel Ferroni, and Caitlin Connell are named as class representatives
and the amount of $500 to be paid to each as an enhancement award for their services to
the class is fair and reasonable and shall be and is hereby approved.

6.

Dismissal With Prejudice. The Court dismisses the action with
prejudice. The Court retains jurisdiction of all matters relating to the interpretation,
administration, implementation, effectuation and enforcement of the Settlement
Agreement and this Order.

7.

Relief to the Class. Defendants are ordered to provide refunds to
Class members in accordance with the Settlement Agreement, and are further ordered to
engage in testing of products in accordance with the Settlement Agreement.



FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT

- 4 -



Case 8:10-cv-01815-JVS -FFM Document 54 Filed 02/28/12 Page 5 of 5 Page ID #:1125





1

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





8.

Payments to Representative Plaintiffs. Defendants are ordered to
pay, within 10 days of the date that Defendants’ Counsel receives a list containing
current addresses of each of the Representative Plaintiffs, a payment of $500 to each of
the twelve Representative Plaintiffs.

9.

Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. The issue of attorneys’ fees
and costs to Plaintiffs’ counsel has been fully resolved and satisfied pursuant to the
Parties’ Notice of Settlement Regarding Attorneys’ Fees and Costs dated February 24,
2012.

10. Failure to Object. Class members who failed to object to the
Settlement Agreement are (1) deemed to have waived their right to object to the
Settlement Agreement; and (2) foreclosed from objecting (whether by appeal or any
other process) to the Settlement Agreement.


IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: February 28, 2012































THE HONORABLE JAMES V. SELNA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE













FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT

- 5 -