IN RE: ZOOM VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS, INC. PRIVACY LITIGATION

District Court, N.D. California·Decided October 21, 2021·No. 3:20-cv-02155·Unknown

Opinion

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 IN RE: ZOOM VIDEO CASE NO. 5:20-CV-02155-LHK COMMUNICATIONS, INC. PRIVACY 12 LITIGATION CLASS ACTION 13 ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION 14 This Document Relates To: SETTLEMENT AND APPROVING FORM AND CONTENT OF CLASS NOTICE 15 ALL ACTIONS.

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 (together, the “Parties”) in the above-described class action (“Action”) have applied for an order, 3 pursuant to Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, regarding certain matters in connection 4 with a proposed settlement of the Action, in accordance with a Class Action Settlement Agreement and 5 Release (“Settlement Agreement”) entered into by the Parties on July 30, 2021, which, together with 6 the exhibits and appendices thereto, sets forth the terms and conditions for a proposed resolution of this 7 litigation and for its dismissal with prejudice;1 8 WHEREAS, this Court has reviewed the Settlement Agreement entered into by the Parties, all 9 exhibits thereto, the record in this case, and the Parties’ arguments. 10 GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: 11 1. The Court finds that the Parties have shown the Court it will likely be able to approve 12 the proposed Settlement, as embodied in the Settlement Agreement, as being fair, reasonable and 13 adequate under Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, subject to further consideration at 14 the Final Approval Hearing to be conducted, as described in Paragraph 21 below. 15 2. All terms and definitions used herein have the same meanings as set forth in the 16 Settlement Agreement. 17 3. The Court has reviewed the terms of the proposed Settlement Agreement, the exhibits 18 and attachments thereto, Plaintiffs’ motion papers and briefs, and the declaration of counsel. Based on 19 its review of these papers, the Court finds that the Settlement Agreement appears to be the result of 20 serious, informed, non-collusive negotiations. 21 4. The terms of the Settlement Agreement do not improperly grant preferential treatment 22 to any individual or segment of the Settlement Class and fall within the range of possible approval as 23 fair, reasonable, and adequate. 24 25

26 1 The motion for preliminary approval of proposed class action settlement contains a notice of motion 27 that was filed and paginated separately from the memorandum of points and authorities in support of the motion. Civil Local Rule 7-2(b) provides that the notice of motion and points and authorities 28 should be contained in one document with the same pagination. See Civ. Loc. R. 7-2(b).” E.g., Steeg v. Ford Motor Co., No. 19-CV-05833-LHK, 2020 WL 2121508, at *1 n.1 (N.D. Cal. May 5, 2020). 2 and all of the terms and conditions contained therein. 3 Certification for Settlement Purposes Only 4 6. The Settlement Agreement defines the Settlement Class as follows,: 5 All Persons in the United States who, between March 30, 2016 and the Settlement Date, registered, used, opened, or downloaded the Zoom Meetings 6 Application (“App”), except for (i) all Persons who have only registered, used, opened, or downloaded the Zoom Meetings App through an Enterprise-Level 7 Account or a Zoom for Government Account, (ii) Zoom and its officers and directors, and (iii) the Judge or Magistrate Judge to whom the action is 8 assigned and any member of those Judges' staffs or immediate family members. 9 7. If the Settlement Agreement is not finally approved by this Court, or if such final 10 approval is reversed or materially modified on appeal by any court, (a) to the extent applicable, the 11 Preliminary Approval Order, the Final Approval Order, and the Judgment, and all of its or their 12 provisions will be vacated by its or their own terms, including, but not limited to, vacating any and all 13 rulings regarding class certification for settlement purposes, including conditional certification of the 14 Settlement Class, conditional appointment of Plaintiffs as Class Representatives, and conditional 15 appointment of Plaintiffs’ Counsel as Class Counsel; (b) the Settlement Agreement will be deemed 16 null and void ab initio (except for Sections 2.1(b)(i), 2.1(e), 2.1(f), 2.1(h), 2.1(i), 2.1(j), and 9 of the 17 Settlement Agreement), and the Action will revert to the status that existed before the Settlement 18 Agreement’s execution date; and (c) (i) no term or draft of the Settlement Agreement, (ii) nor any part 19 of the Parties’ settlement discussions, negotiations, or documentation (including any declaration or 20 brief filed in support of the motion for preliminary approval or motion for final approval), (iii) nor any 21 rulings regarding class certification for settlement purposes (including the Preliminary Approval Order 22 and, if applicable, the Final Approval Order and the Judgment), will have any effect or be admissible 23 into evidence for any purpose in the Action or any other proceeding. If the Court does not approve the 24 Settlement or enter the Final Approval Order and the Judgment for any reason, or if the Final Settlement 25 Date cannot occur for any reason, Zoom shall retain all its rights, for example, to object to the 26 maintenance of the Action as a class action, to move for summary judgment, and to assert defenses at 27 trial, and nothing in this Settlement Agreement or other papers or proceedings related to the Settlement 28 2 maintained as a class action, or for any other purpose. 3 8. Solely for purposes of effectuating the proposed Settlement, the Court finds, pursuant 4 to Rule 23(e)(1), that the prerequisites for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5 23(a) are likely to be found satisfied as: the Settlement Class is comprised of millions of individuals; 6 there are questions of law or fact common to the Settlement Class; the Class Representatives’ claims 7 are typical of those of Settlement Class Members; and the Settlement Class Representatives will fairly 8 and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class. 9 9. Solely for purposes of effectuating the proposed Settlement, the Court finds, pursuant 10 to Rule 23(e)(1), that the prerequisites for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 23(b)(3) are likely to be found satisfied as: the questions of law or fact common to the Settlement Class 12 predominate over individual questions and class action litigation is superior to other available methods 13 for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy. 14 10. Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and solely for purposes of 15 effectuating the Settlement, the Court hereby appoints as Class Representatives: Caitlin Brice, Heddi 16 N. Cundle, Angela Doyle, Isabelle Gmerek, Kristen Hartmann, Peter Hirshberg, M.F., Therese 17 Jimenez, Lisa T. Johnston, Oak Life Church, Saint Paulus Lutheran Church, and Stacey Simins. 18 11. Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN RE: ZOOM VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS, INC. PRIVACY LITIGATION, (N.D. Cal. 2021).

IN RE: ZOOM VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS, INC. PRIVACY LITIGATION (IN RE: ZOOM VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS, INC. PRIVACY LITIGATION) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.