Burzdak v. Universal Screen Arts, Inc.

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 KAREN BURZDAK, Case No. 21-cv-02148-EMC

8 Plaintiffs, ORDER APPOINTING CY PRES 9 v.

10 UNIVERSAL SCREEN ARTS, INC., Docket No. 127 11 Defendants.

12 13 The Court appoints the Consumer Federation of California (CFC) as the cy pres recipient 14 in the present case. Plaintiff filed a supplemental post-distribution accounting statement, noting 15 that following a re-distribution of uncashed settlement funds, “as of December 13, 2024, a total of 16 2,519 checks in the sum of $43,703.18 remain uncashed.” Docket No. 127 at 1-2; Brunner Decl. ¶ 17 13. Plaintiff states “it is not administratively feasible to redistribute the balance, so the Parties 18 believe it is appropriate to award the balance to a cy pres recipient. See Docket No. 99-1 ¶ 2.1(f) 19 (“If redistribution is not feasible, such funds shall be distributed to a cy pres recipient approved by 20 the Court.”).” Docket No. 127 at 2. 21 The Ninth Circuit requires the Court to consider whether the cy pres “bears a substantial 22 nexus to the interests of the class members.” Lane v. Facebook, Inc., 696 F.3d 811, 821 (9th Cir. 23 2012). The Northern District of California’s Procedural Guidelines for Class Action Settlements 24 also require the parties to explain how a recipient is “related to the subject matter of the lawsuit 25 and the class members’ claims,” and requires parties to “identify any relationship they or their 26 counsel have with the proposed cy pres recipients.” Procedural Guidelines, Preliminary Approval 27 § 8. 1 state and federal laws that place consumer protection ahead of corporate profit, including 2 || testifying before the California legislature on dozens of bills each year that affect millions of 3 California consumers and appearing before state agencies in support of consumer regulations. 4 || Herrell Decl. § 2. Relevant to this case, a significant focus of CFC’s activities has been protecting 5 consumers by ensuring protections from automatically renewing membership fees. Jd. §] 3. CFC 6 || has been appointed as a cy pres recipient in numerous consumer protection class actions and will 7 use any awarded money to help advance the rights of California consumers to be free from 8 || unwanted subscriptions and recurring fees. Id. Jj 4-5. 9 CFC’s focus is on California consumers, and the proposed Class was limited to California 10 || consumers. Docket 127 at 3. Awarding CFC the cy pres funds is likely to advance the interests of 11 absent class members by supporting robust protections against automatically renewing fees. 12 || Further, the parties and their counsel have no relationship with the proposed cy pres recipient. 5 13 Defendant has no objection. 14 Accordingly, CFC is appointed as cy pres, and distribution of the remaining balance of the 3 15 Settlement Fund is to occur within 30 days of this Order. 16 IT IS SO ORDERED.

19 Dated: January 8, 2025 20 21 EDWARD M. CHEN 22 United States District Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28