Brown v. Tetra Tech, Inc.

Opinion

LAGARION BROWN, et al., No. 2:20-cv-01133-DJC-DMC

Plaintiffs, v. TETRA TECH, INC., et al., Defendants.

On February 6, 2024, Plaintiffs moved for preliminary approval of their

amended Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 (“Rule 23”) class, Fair Labor Standards

Act (“FLSA”) collective, and Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) settlement. (ECF

No. 46.) Plaintiffs sought: (1) conditional certification of the settlement class and FLSA

collective; (2) preliminary approval of the amended settlement; (3) approval of the

amended class an d collective notice; (4) appointment of Plaintiffs as class representatives; (5) appointment of Plaintiffs’ counsel as class counsel; (6) appointment of Phoenix Class Action Administration Solutions as the settlement administrator; and (7) a hearing date for final approval of the settlement. (Id. at 3.) The Court granted the Motion in part and denied it in part. (ECF No. 53.) Specifically, the Court granted conditional certification of the settlement class and FLSA collective; appointed Plaintiffs Lagarion Brown, Roy Jackson, Yaphett Saunders, Isaac Saunders, Hakeem Allambie, and Nichlon Garrett as the class representatives;

appointed Plaintiffs’ counsel Mallison & Martinez as class counsel (“Class Counsel”);

and appointed Phoenix Class Action Administration Solutions as the settlement

administrator (“Settlement Administrator”). (Id. at 28.)

However, the Court denied preliminary approval of the amended settlement

and notice without prejudice in order for the Parties to remedy issues related to the

treatment of Plaintiffs’ PAGA claims. (Id.) The Court also required the Parties to more

clearly specify the required contents of any dispute concerning the number of

workweeks used to calculate class members’ estimated settlement shares in the

amended notice. (Id. at 25–26.) Plaintiffs were granted forty-five days to submit a

further amended settlement and notice, which they have now done. (ECF No. 54.)

The Court has reviewed the further amended settlement (“Further Amended

Class Settlement”) and further amended notice (“Further Amended Class Notice”),

and find they adequately address the Court’s concerns. Concerning the Further

Amended Class Settlement, the Court previously found that preliminary approval of

the settlement was appropriate with respect to Plaintiffs’ Rule 23 class and FLSA

collective claims. (ECF No. 53 at 11–19.) However, the Court noted concerns

regarding Plaintiffs’ PAGA claims. Although the Court found that the PAGA settlement

amount was fair and reasonable, the settlement did not properly inform PAGA class

members that they would be bound by settlement of the PAGA claims and would

receive a share of the PAGA settlement regardless of whether they opted out of the

settlement or not.1 (Id. at 19, 23–24.) The Parties have now revised their settlement to

accurately explain that all PAGA class members will receive their pro rata portion of

the PAGA payment, regardless of whether they opt out of the settlement, and will

1 Because a PAGA plaintiff serves “as the proxy or agent of the state's labor law enforcement agencies,” “a judgment in th[e] action binds all those, including nonparty aggrieved employees, who would be bound by a judgment in an action brought by the government.” Arias v. Superior Ct., 46 Cal. 4th 969, 986 (2009). Thus, unlike a class action, there is no mechanism for opting out of a judgment entered on a PAGA claim. Amaro v. Anaheim Arena Mgmt., LLC, 69 Cal. App. 5th 521, 541 n.5 (2021). release their PAGA claims. (See ECF No. 54-1 §§ I.X, III.D.6, III.H.2.a.) Accordingly, the

Court will approve the Further Amended Class Settlement.

The Court also previously found that the Rule 23 class and FLSA collective

notice were largely adequate, but required clarifications regarding Plaintiffs’ PAGA

claims and the procedure to dispute class members’ settlement share calculations.

(ECF No. 53 at 24–27.) The Further Amended Class Notice has been revised to

explain that any members of the PAGA class will be bound by the Further Amended

Class Settlement’s release of their PAGA claims and will receive payment for those

claims. (ECF No. 54-3 §§ IV–V.) In addition, the Further Amended Class Notice now

informs class members of the full scope of information they must submit in order to

dispute the workweeks used to calculate their anticipated settlement share. (Id. § III.)

Accordingly, the Court will approve the Further Amended Class Notice.

Finally, the Court will approve the following implementation schedule

proposed by the Parties (see ECF No. 46-7 at 5; ECF No. 54-1):

Event Date Last day for Defendants Tetra Tech, Inc. 15 calendar days after entry of the and Jesco Environmental and Court’s order granting preliminary

Geotechnical Services, Inc. to provide to approval of the Further Amended Class the Settlement Administrator a list of the Settlement and Further Amended Class names, most recent known mailing Notice. address and telephone number, Social Security Number, and respective

number of workweeks that each Class Member2 worked during the Settlement Class Period3 in a readable Microsoft Office Excel Spreadsheet (“Class List and Data”).

Last day for Settlement Administrator to 10 calendar days after Settlement mail the Further Am ended Class Notice Administrator’s receipt of Class List and to Class Members. Data.

2 As defined in the Further Amended Class Settlement. (ECF No. 54-1 § I.C.) 3 As defined in the Further Amended Class Settlement. (ECF No. 54-1 § I.B.) Last day for Class Members to submit _—_| 30 calendar days after the initial mailing written request for exclusion from the of the Further Amended Class Notice to Further Amended Class Settlement to Class Members. the Settlement Administrator. Last day for Class Members to return the | 30 calendar days after the initial mailing FLSA Opt-In Form to the Settlement of the Further Amended Class Notice to Administrator. Class Members. Last day for Class Members to objectto | 30 calendar days after the initial mailing the Further Amended Class Settlement. | of the Further Amended Class Notice to Class Members. / Last day for Class Members to submit _—_| 30 calendar days after the initial mailing written notice of dispute concerning the | of the Further Amended Class Notice to number of workweeks used to calculate | Class Members. his or her estimated settlement share. Last day for Class Counsel to file with the | 49 calendar days before the final Court and serve declaration by settlement approval hearing. Settlement Administrator specifying the due diligence undertaken with regard to | | the mailing of the Further Amended Class Notice. Final settlement approval hearing. February 20, 2025. In accordance with the above, IT |IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Plaintiffs’ Further Amended Class Settlement (ECF No. 54-1) and Further Amended Class Notice (ECF No. 54-3) are APPROVED; 2. The hearing for final settlement approval is set for February 20, 2025, at 1:30 pm before the undersigned in Courtroom 10, with the motion for final approval of class action settlement to be filed at least 35 days in advance of the final settlement approval hearing, in accordance with Local Rule 230(b); and 3. The Parties are directed to implement the Further Amended Class Settlement in accordance with the schedule set forth above. Dated: August 12, 2024 “Danel CoD batt Hon. Daniel alabretta

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE