Case 3:14-cv-03264-JD Document 1934 Filed 10/30/17 Page 1 of 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
` MASTER FILE NO. 3:14-cv-03264-JD
`
`[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
`FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS
`ACTION SETTLEMENTS WITH
`DEFENDANTS NEC TOKIN, NITSUKO
`AND OKAYA AND APPROVING THE
`PLAN OF ALLOCATION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`IN RE: CAPACITORS ANTITRUST
`LITIGATION
`
`
`THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
`
`ALL INDIRECT PURCHASER ACTIONS
`
`
`Law Offices
`COTCHETT, PITRE &
`MCCARTHY, LLP
`
`Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlements with Defendants NEC Tokin, Nitsuko
`and Okaya and Approving the Plan of Allocation;
`Case No. 3:14-cv-03264-JD
`
`

`

`Case 3:14-cv-03264-JD Document 1934 Filed 10/30/17 Page 2 of 5
`
`
`
`
`
`This matter has come before the Court to determine whether there is any cause why this
`
`Court should not approve the settlements with Defendants NEC TOKIN Corp./NEC TOKIN
`
`America Inc. (collectively “NEC Tokin), Nitsuko Electronics Corporation (“Nitsuko”), and
`
`Okaya Electric Industries Co., Ltd. (“Okaya”) (collectively, the “Settling Defendants”), and
`
`approve IPPs’ Plan of Allocation. The Court, having reviewed the motion (Dkt. No. 1704), the
`
`Settlement Agreements, the pleadings and other papers on file in this action, and the statements of
`
`counsel and the parties, including at the August 10, 2017 Fairness Hearing, hereby finds that the
`
`Settlements and Plan of Allocation should be approved. Accordingly, the Court enters this Order
`
`of Final Approval.
`
`
`
`
`
`Good cause appearing therefore:
`
`IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT:
`
`1.
`
`The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this litigation, and all actions
`
`within this litigation (collectively, the “Action”) and over the parties to the Settlement
`
`Agreements, including all members of the Settlement Classes and the Settling Defendants.
`
`2.
`
`For purposes of this Order, except as otherwise set forth herein, the Court
`
`incorporates the definitions contained in the Settlement Agreements [ECF Nos. 1305-3 through
`
`1305-5].
`
`3.
`
`The Court hereby finally approves and confirms the settlements set forth in the
`
`Settlement Agreements between Class Representatives and the Settling Defendants, and finds that
`
`said settlements are, in all respects, fair, reasonable, and adequate to the Settlement Classes
`
`pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
`
`4.
`
`The following Classes are certified for settlement purposes only, pursuant to Rule
`
`23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure:
`a. NEC TOKIN
`
`All persons and entities in the United States who, during, the period
`from April 1, 2002 to July 15, 2016, purchased directly from a
`distributor one or more Capacitor(s) that a Defendant manufactured.
`Excluded from the Class are Defendants, their parent companies,
`subsidiaries and affiliates, any co-conspirators, Defendants’
`_____________________________________________________________________________
`Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlements with Defendants NEC Tokin, Nitsuko
`and Okaya and Approving the Plan of Allocation;
`Case No. 3:14-cv-03264-JD
`
`
`1
`
`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
`
`Law Offices
`COTCHETT, PITRE &
`MCCARTHY, LLP
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:14-cv-03264-JD Document 1934 Filed 10/30/17 Page 3 of 5
`
`and
`entities
`federal government
`case,
`this
`in
`attorneys
`instrumentalities, states and their subdivisions, all judges assigned to
`this case, all jurors in this case.
`
`b. NITSUKO
`
`All persons and entities in the United States who, during, the period
`from January 1, 2003 to March 29, 2016, purchased directly from a
`distributor one or more Capacitor(s) that a Defendant manufactured.
`Excluded from the Class are Defendants, their parent companies,
`subsidiaries and affiliates, any co-conspirators, Defendants’
`attorneys
`in
`this
`case,
`federal government
`entities
`and
`instrumentalities, states and their subdivisions, all judges assigned to
`this case, all jurors in this case.
`
`c. OKAYA
`
`All persons and entities in the United States who, during, the period
`from January 1, 2002 to April 14, 2016, purchased one or more
`Capacitor(s) from a distributor (or from an entity other than a
`Defendant) that a Defendant or alleged co-conspirator manufactured.
`Excluded from the Class are Defendants, their parent companies,
`subsidiaries and Affiliates, any co-conspirators, Defendants’
`attorneys
`in
`this
`case,
`federal government
`entities
`and
`instrumentalities, states and their subdivisions, all judges assigned to
`this case, all jurors in this case, and all persons and entities who
`directly purchased capacitors from Defendants.
`These settlement classes shall be referred to herein as the Settlement Classes.
`
`
`
`The Court finds the prerequisites to a class action under Federal Rule of Civil
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`Procedure 23(a) have been satisfied for settlement purposes by each of the Settlement Classes in
`
`that:
`
`a. there are at least thousands of geographically dispersed settlement class
`
`members, making joinder of all members impracticable;
`
`b. there are questions of law and fact common to the settlement classes which
`
`predominate over individual issues
`
`c. the claims or defenses of the class representatives are typical of the claims or
`
`defenses of the settlement classes;
`
`_____________________________________________________________________________
`Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlements with Defendants NEC Tokin, Nitsuko
`and Okaya and Approving the Plan of Allocation;
`Case No. 3:14-cv-03264-JD
`
`
`2
`
`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
`
`Law Offices
`COTCHETT, PITRE &
`MCCARTHY, LLP
`
`

`

`Case 3:14-cv-03264-JD Document 1934 Filed 10/30/17 Page 4 of 5
`
`
`
`d. the Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests
`
`of the settlement classes, and have retained counsel experienced in antitrust
`
`class action litigation who have, and will continue to, adequately represent the
`
`settlement classes; and
`
`e. resolution through class settlements is superior to individual settlements.
`
`7.
`
`The Court finds that this Action may be maintained as a class action under Federal
`
`Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) for settlement because: (i) questions of fact and law common to
`
`members of the Settlement Classes predominate over any questions affecting only the claims of
`
`individual members; and (ii) a class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and
`
`efficient adjudication of this controversy.
`
`8.
`
`Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g), the Court hereby confirms that
`
`Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy LLP is appointed as Settlement Class Counsel, and that Indirect
`
`Purchaser Plaintiffs Michael Brooks, CAE Sound, Steve Wong, Toy-Knowlogy Inc., AGS
`
`Devices Co., AGS Devices Ltd., J&O Electronics, Nebraska Dynamics, Inc., Angstrom, Inc.,
`
`MakersLED and In Home Tech Solutions, Inc. are appointed to serve as Class Representatives on
`
`behalf of the Settlement Classes.
`
`9.
`
`IPPs’ notice of the Class Settlements to the Settlement Classes was the best notice
`
`practicable under the circumstances. The notice satisfied due process and provided adequate
`
`information to the Settlement Classes of all matters relating to the Class Settlements, and fully
`
`satisfied the requirements of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(c)(2) and (e)(1).
`
`10.
`
`The persons and entities identified in Exhibit A to this Order have timely and
`
`validly requested exclusion from the Settlement Classes and, therefore, are excluded. Such
`
`persons and entities are not included in or bound by this Order. Such persons and entities are not
`
`entitled to any recovery of the settlement proceeds obtained through these Class Settlements.
`
`11.
`
`No valid objections were filed regarding any of the Class Settlements.
`
`12.
`Class Members on a pro rata basis based on qualifying purchases of capacitors, is fair,
`
`The Court finds that IPPs’ proposed Plan of Allocation, proposing to pay putative
`
`_____________________________________________________________________________
`Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlements with Defendants NEC Tokin, Nitsuko
`and Okaya and Approving the Plan of Allocation;
`Case No. 3:14-cv-03264-JD
`
`
`3
`
`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
`
`Law Offices
`COTCHETT, PITRE &
`MCCARTHY, LLP
`
`

`

`Case 3:14-cv-03264-JD Document 1934 Filed 10/30/17 Page 5 of 5
`
`
`
`reasonable, and adequate. In re Citric Acid Antitrust Litig., 145 F. Supp. 2d 1152, 1154 (N.D.
`
`Cal. 2001). The Plan of Allocation does not unfairly favor any Class Member, or group of Class
`
`Members, to the detriment of others.
`
`13. Without affecting the finality of this Order in any way, this Court hereby retains
`
`continuing jurisdiction over:
`
`a. implementation of these settlements and any distribution to members of the
`
`Settlement Classes pursuant to further orders of this Court;
`
`b. disposition of the Settlement Fund;
`
`c. determining attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses, and interest;
`
`d. the Action until Final Judgment contemplated hereby has become effective and
`
`each and every act agreed to be performed by the parties all have been
`
`performed pursuant to the Settlement Agreements;
`
`e. hearing and ruling on any matters relating to the plan of allocation of
`
`settlement proceeds; and
`
`f. all parties to the Action and Releasing Parties, for the purpose of enforcing and
`
`administering the Settlement Agreements and the mutual releases and other
`
`documents contemplated by, or executed in connection with the Agreement.
`
`14.
`
`The Court finds, pursuant to Rules 54(a) and (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Procedure, that Final Judgments of Dismissal with prejudice as to the Settling Defendants
`
`(“Judgments”) should be entered forthwith and further finds that there is no just reason for delay
`
`in the entry of the Judgments, as Final Judgments, in accordance with the Settlement Agreements.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: October 30, 2017
`
`
`
`
`Hon. James Donato
`United States District Judge
`
`
`
`_____________________________________________________________________________
`Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlements with Defendants NEC Tokin, Nitsuko
`and Okaya and Approving the Plan of Allocation;
`Case No. 3:14-cv-03264-JD
`
`
`4
`
`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
`
`Law Offices
`COTCHETT, PITRE &
`MCCARTHY, LLP
`
`