Gatchalian v. Atlantic Recovery Solutions, LLC

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: March 6, 2024
• Docket: 3:22-cv-04108
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 HARRIET GATCHALIAN, Case No. 3:22-cv-04108-JSC

8 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: CLASS 9 v. NOTICE

10 ATLANTIC RECOVERY SOLUTIONS, Re: Dkt. Nos. 58, 59 LLC, et al., 11 Defendants.

13 Plaintiff brought this consumer class action against Defendants for abusive, deceptive, and 14 unfair debt collection practices. The Court previously granted the parties’ motion for preliminary 15 approval of a class action settlement. (Dkt. No. 57.) Plaintiff’s motion for final approval and 16 motion for attorney’s fees and costs are now pending before the Court. (Dkt. Nos. 58, 59.) 17 Having reviewed the motions and the supporting papers, the Court orders Plaintiff to show cause 18 as to why she should not be required to redo the notice provided to the class given the issues 19 described below. 20 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(h)(1), “[n]otice of the motion [for attorney’s 21 fees] must be served on all parties and, for motions by class counsel, directed to class members in 22 a reasonable manner.” Notice of the motion for attorney’s fees is required in both common fund 23 and statutory fee cases. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 advisory committee’s note (2003) (“Because 24 members of the class have an interest in the arrangements for payment of class counsel whether 25 that payment comes from the class fund or is made directly by another party, notice is required in 26 all instances.”); see also 3 NEWBERG AND RUBENSTEIN ON CLASS ACTIONS § 8:22 (6th ed. Nov. 27 2023 update) (“whether or not class members are paying counsel’s fee directly, fee notice plays an 1 important role in class members’ capacity to evaluate the fairness of the settlement itself.”); In re 2 || Mercury Interactive Corp. Sec. Litig., 618 F.3d 988, 994 (9th Cir. 2010) (“Allowing class 3 || members an opportunity thoroughly to examine counsel’s fee motion, inquire into the bases for 4 || various charges and ensure that they are adequately documented and supported is essential for the 5 || protection of the rights of class members.”). 6 On preliminary approval, the Court expressed concerns regarding the class notice. (Dkt. 7 |} No. 51.) In response to the Court’s concerns, the parties submitted a revised notice which, among 8 other things, (1) included a placeholder website link where class members could find key 9 || deadlines and case documents, (2) advised class members they could object to Plaintiff's motion 10 for attorney’s fees, and (3) advised class members when the motion for attorney’s fees and the 11 motion for final approval would be filed and how to access a copy of it. (Dkt. No. 54-1.) The 12 || Court found these notice procedures, among others, appeared sufficient to ensure adequate notice 5 13 under Rule 23(e), (h). (Dkt. No. 57 at 17.) 14 On final approval, Plaintiff attached a copy of the Notice distributed to class members

3 15 which includes a link this website: www.gatchaliansettlement.com, where, according to the 16 || Notice, class members can view “the Notice, preliminary approval order, motions for preliminary 3 17 and final approval, and attorneys’ fees.” (Dkt. No. 58-2 at 6.) The Court has reviewed the website

Z 18 || and it does not include this information. Below is a screenshot of the “Important Court 19 |) Documents” tab: 20 HARRIET GATCHALIAN v. ATLANTIC RECOVERY SOLUTIONS LLC, et al.

23 Important Court Documents

35 26 27 || www.gatchaliansettlement.com (last visited March 6, 2024). Neither the motion for final approval 28 nor the motion for attorney’s fees and costs are available on the website. It thus does not appear

1 class members were provided notice of Plaintiff's motion for attorney’s fees as required. 2 Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to why she should not be 3 required to redo the notice provided to the class to comply with Rule 23(h)(1). Plaintiff shall file 4 || a written response to this Order by March 21, 2024. 5 In light of this Order, the Court VACATES the March 14, 2024 hearing on the motion for 6 || final approval and motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: March 6, 2024 10 ne CQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY 12 United States District Judge

15 16

= 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28