Buy This Entire Record For
Nugussie v. HMSHost North America
United States District Court, W.D. Washington
February 22, 2018
BEREKET NUGUSSIE, an individual; PAUL ROMOLINO, an individual, MOHAMED ABDI. an individual, and INDIRA MOHAMED, an individual, Plaintiffs,
HMSHOST NORTH AMERICA, a foreign business entity, and AUTOGRILL, S.p.A., a foreign corporation, Defendants.
CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT ORDER AND FINAL
Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge.
Honorable Robert S. Lasnik This matter came before the Court
on Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of the proposed
class settlement (the "Settlement"). The Court has
considered all papers filed and proceedings in this matter
and is fully informed regarding the facts surrounding the
proposed Settlement. Based upon this information, the Court
approves the proposed Settlement as fair, reasonable, and
adequate. The Court hereby enters this Class Action
Settlement Order and Final Judgment ("Final
Judgment"), which constitutes a final adjudication on
the merits of all claims of the Settlement Class.
October 31, 2017, the Court granted preliminary approval to
the proposed Settlement between Plaintiffs and Defendant
HMSHost North America ("HMSHost"). The proposed
Settlement resolves all of the Settlement Class Members'
claims against HMSHost in exchange for HMSHost's
agreement to provide certain monetary and non-monetary relief
to Settlement Class Members as set forth in the Settlement
Agreement and Release of Claims ("Agreement"). On
February 22, 2018, the Court held a Settlement Hearing to
consider whether to grant final approval to the Settlement
and to consider Class Counsel's application for an award
of attorney's fees and costs ("Fee and Cost
Application''), and a Service Award to Plaintiffs.
The Court heard argument from counsel and allowed others to
appear to voice their support for, or objection to, the
Settlement, the Fee Application, or both.
read, reviewed, and considered the papers filed in support of
and any in opposition to final approval of the Settlement,
including supporting declarations; oral arguments of counsel
and presentations by any Settlement Class Members who
appeared at the hearing; Class Counsel's Fee and Cost
Application; the Agreement; and the pleadings, the Court
finds and concludes as follows:
1. Definitions. The definitions and provisions of
the Agreement are fully incorporated into this Final
2. Jurisdiction. The Court has jurisdiction over the
subject matter of the Agreement with respect to and over all
parties to the Agreement, including Plaintiffs and all
Settlement Class Members.
3. Settlement Approval. The Court hereby grants
final approval to the Settlement and finds the Settlement is,
in all respects, fair, reasonable, and adequate, and in the
best interests of the Settlement Class. The Court finds the
Settlement is within the authority of the Parties and the
result of extensive arm's length negotiations.
4. Exclusion from Settlement Class. No members of
the Class have timely and validly requested to be excluded
from the Class and the Settlement.
5. Objections. No objections have been brought to
the Court's attention.
6. No Admission. Neither this Final Judgment nor the
Agreement is an admission or concession by HMSHost of the
validity of any claims or of any liability or wrongdoing or
of any violation of law. This Final Judgment and the
Agreement do not constitute a concession and shall not be
used as an admission or indication of any wrongdoing, fault,
or omission by HMSHost or any Other person in connection with
any transaction, event, or occurrence, and neither this Final
Judgment nor the Agreement nor any related documents in this
proceeding, nor any reports or accounts thereof, shall be
offered or received in evidence in any civil, criminal, or
administrative action or proceeding, other than such
proceedings as may be necessary to consummate or enforce this
Final Judgment, the Agreement, and all releases given
thereunder, or to establish the affirmative defenses of res
judicata or collateral estoppel barring the pursuit of claims
released in the Agreement.
7. Dismissal with Prejudice. The Court hereby
dismisses with prejudice all claims of members of the
Settlement Class against HMSHost and other released parties
as described in the Agreement.
8. Release. The Settlement Class members and
Plaintiffs, themselves and as the representative of the
Settlement Class and on behalf of each Settlement Class
Member, and each of their respective agents, successors,
heirs, assigns, and any other person who can claim by or
through them in any manner, fully, finally, and forever
irrevocably release, relinquish, and forever discharge with
prejudice all claims released under the Settlement against
the released parties.
9. Injunction Against Asserting Released Claims.
Plaintiffs, all Settlement Class Members, and any person or
entity allegedly acting on behalf of Plaintiffs and
Settlement Class Members, either directly, representatively,
or in any other capacity, are permanently enjoined from
commencing or prosecuting against those released via the
Agreement any action or proceeding in any court or tribunal
asserting any claim released in the Agreement. This
injunction is necessary to protect and effectuate the
Settlement, this Order, and the Court's flexibility and
authority to effectuate the Settlement and to enter judgment
when appropriate, and is ordered in aid of the Court's
jurisdiction and to protect its judgments pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1651(a).
10. Class Notice. The Settlement Administrator
completed the delivery of Class Notice according to the terms
of the Agreement. The Class Notice given by the Settlement
Administrator to the Class, which set forth the principal
terms of the Agreement and other matters, was the best
practicable notice under the circumstances. The Class Notice
program prescribed by the Agreement was reasonable and
provided due and adequate notice of these proceedings and of
the matters set forth therein, including the terms of the
Agreement, to all parties entitled to such notice. The Class
Notice given to the Class Members satisfied the requirements
of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and the requirements of
constitutional due process. The Class Notice was reasonably
calculated under the circumstances to apprise Class Members
of the pendency of this Action, all material elements of the
Settlement, and their opportunity to exclude themselves from,
object to, or comment on the ...