United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle
ALBERT VIESSE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS, INC., and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants.
JUDGMENT AND FINAL APPROVAL ORDER
C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' unopposed
motion for final approval of the class action settlement,
approval of the attorney fee and expense award, and approval
of the incentive payment (Dkt. Nos. 48, 52), as well as an
April 3, 2018 fairness hearing. For the reasons explained
herein, the Court GRANTS the motion and AWARDS the relief
Court previously reviewed the Stipulated Settlement Agreement
and Release ("Settlement" or "Agreement")
in this matter. (Dkt. No. 45 at 15-25, 27-29.) On December
27, 2017, the Court entered an order (Dkt. No. 47) granting
Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of the
Settlement (Dkt. No. 44).
now moves for final approval of the Settlement (Dkt. No. 48).
Plaintiff and his counsel have also moved for an award of
attorney fees and the incentive payment to the class
representative (Dkt. No. 52), as provided for in the
Settlement. Both motions are unopposed. The Court held a
fairness (final approval) hearing on April 3, 2018.
duly considered all submissions and arguments presented, it
is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:
Court GRANTS final approval of the proposed settlement upon
the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement. The
Court finds that the terms of the proposed settlement are
fair, adequate and reasonable and comply with Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 23.
Court ORDERS that the following settlement class
(“Settlement Class”) is certified for settlement
consumers (as defined by FACTA) to whom Tacoma Screw
Products, Inc. (“TSP”) provided, at any time
during the period July 1, 2014 to July 14, 2016, an
electronically printed receipt at the point of a sale or
transaction at any TSP store, on which receipt was printed
the expiration date of the consumer's credit card or
Court FINDS that, for purposes of the Settlement, the
above-defined Settlement Class meets all of the requirements
for class certification. Specifically, (a) the Settlement
Class is ascertainable, (b) the members of the Settlement
Class are so numerous that joinder is impracticable, (c)
there are questions of law and fact common to the Settlement
Class members which predominate over any individual
questions, (d) the representative Plaintiff's claims are
typical of the claims of the Settlement Class members, (e)
the Class Representative and Class Counsel have fairly,
adequately, reasonably and competently represented and
protected the interests of the Settlement Class, and (f) a
class action is superior to other available methods for the
fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy.
Court APPOINTS Plaintiff Albert Viesse as the Class
Representative for the Settlement Class.
Court APPOINTS attorneys Chant Yedalian of Chant &
Company, a Professional Law Corporation, and James A.
Sturdevant as Class Counsel for the Settlement Class.
Court APPOINTS Atticus Administration, LLC as the Settlement
Court FINDS that the Settlement is the product of serious,
informed, non-collusive negotiations conducted at
arm's-length by the parties. In making these findings,
the Court considered, among other factors, the potential
statutory damages claimed in the lawsuit on behalf of
Plaintiff and members of the Settlement Class, TSP's
potential liability, the risks of continued litigation
including trial outcome, delay and potential appeals, the
substantial benefits available to the Settlement Class as a
result of the Settlement, and the fact that the proposed
Settlement represents a compromise of the parties'
respective positions rather than the result of a finding of
liability at trial. The Court further finds that the terms of
the Settlement have no obvious deficiencies and do not
improperly grant preferential treatment to any individual
member of the Settlement Class.
Court FINDS that the notice provided to Settlement Class
members and the means by which it was provided, all of which
the Court previously approved, constituted the best notice
practicable under the circumstances and was in full
compliance with the United States Constitution, Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 23, and the requirements of due process.
The Court further finds that the notice fully and accurately
informed Settlement Class members of all material elements of
the lawsuit and proposed class action Settlement, of each
member's right to be excluded from the ...