Middle Rider v. Moving Solutions, Inc ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 12 BARBARA MIDDLE RIDER for GARY Case No. 17-CV-04015-LHK MIDDLE RIDER, et al., 13 Plaintiffs, ORDER MODIFYING ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL 14 v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 163, 165, 173 15 MOVING SOLUTIONS, INC, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 On May 1, 2020, the Court granted final approval of the parties’ class action settlement, 19 dismissed this case with prejudice, and entered final judgment. ECF No. 163, 164. Yet on January 20 20, 2021, Plaintiffs notified the Court that one of the three Defendants—Moving Solutions, Inc. 21 (“Moving Solutions”)—has failed to pay its $20,000 portion of the $470,000 that was due to the 22 settlement administrator on December 28, 2020. ECF No. 165 at 1–2. To ensure a timely 23 disbursement of settlement funds to the class, Plaintiffs’ counsel proposed two alternatives. Id. at 24 2–3. 25 On January 31, 2021, the Court ordered Moving Solutions and Moving Solutions’ 26 principal, Rick Philpott, to show cause and to respond to Plaintiffs’ proposals. ECF No. 166. In 27 response, Moving Solutions and Mr. Philpott filed a declaration under penalty of perjury on 1 February 3, 2021. ECF No. 168-1. Mr. Philpott conceded that “th[e] [C]ourt has the authority to 2 || issue sanctions for Moving Solutions[]’s non-payment” and represented that “Moving Solutions 3 fully intends to contribute the funds necessary” if and when funds are available. Id. ¥ 12. 4 On February 5, 2021, the Court held a hearing with all parties and Mr. Philpott. The parties 5 and Mr. Philpott were unable to reach agreement at the hearing. Thus, the Court referred the 6 || parties and Mr. Philpott to a settlement conference with United States Magistrate Judge Nathanael 7 Cousins. 8 On February 17, 2021, Plaintiffs’ counsel filed a status report, which stated that the parties 9 and Mr. Philpott did not settle, and which proposed the below solution to ensure a timely 10 disbursement of all $470,000 to the settlement class. ECF No. 172. The Court adopts Plaintiffs’ 11 counsel’s solution and MODIFIES the Order Granting Final Approval, ECF No. 163, as follows: 12 Plaintiffs’ counsel’s fees will cover Moving Solutions’ $20,000 shortfall. Plaintiffs’ 13 counsel will receive only $97,500 from the funds deposited with the Class Administrator. 14 || However, Plaintiffs’ counsel retains the right to pursue collection of $20,000 in fees from Moving 3 15 Solutions and/or its principals. 16 None of the class members nor the class administrator will be affected by Moving i 17 Solutions’ failure to timely contribute funds. All other terms and conditions of the Order Granting Z 18 Final Approval remain in effect. “Because this modification of the Order [Granting Final 19 || Approval] does not affect the rights and benefits of class members, no further notice is required.” 20 || Marsh vy. Zaazoom Sols., LLC, No. 11-CV-05226-WHO, 2014 WL 4793034, at *4 (N.D. Cal. 21 Sept. 25, 2014) (collecting cases). 22 || ITISSO ORDERED. 23 24 Dated: February 22, 2021 25 fucy i ‘ Ct \ LUCY @ KOH 26 United States District Judge 27 28 Case No. 17-CV-O401S-LHK