Treehouse Foods, Inc. v. Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc.

Opinion

USDC SDNY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOCUMENT . SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK LECT ONICOLES RILED « wa nn nn nnn nnn nnn naan nn nanan nnn -----X DOC #: sf : DATE FILED: 5/26/2021 IN RE: KEURIG GREEN MOUNTAIN : SINGLE-SERVE COFFEE ANTITRUST : LITIGATION : : 14-md-2542 (VSB) This Document Concerns All Related Actions: wa nn nn nnn nnn nnn naan nn nanan nnn -----X ORDER VERNON S. BRODERICK, United States District Judge: I am in receipt of the conditional objection to the proposed settlement between the Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs (“IPPs”) and Defendant Keurig Green Mountain, Inc. (“Keurig” or “Defendant”) submitted by Plaintiffs TreeHouse Foods, Inc., Bay Valley Foods, LLC, and Sturm Foods, Inc. (collectively, “TreeHouse”) and JBR, Inc. (“JBR” and, together with TreeHouse, “Competitor Plaintiffs”) on May 14, 2021. (Doc. 1326.) I am also in receipt of the responses in opposition filed by Keurig, (Doc. 1331), and the IPPs, (Doc. 1339), on May 21, 2021. Competitor Plaintiffs note that their filing “serve[s] as a formal notice of opt-out from the Proposed Settlement.” (Doc. 1326.) “Class members who opt-out of the settlement extinguish their ability to object to it and those objections need not be considered.” Stinson v. City of N.Y., 256 F. Supp. 3d 293, 292 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); see also Ferrick v. Spotify USA Inc., No. 16-cv-8412 (AJN), 2018 WL 2324076, at * 7 (S.D.N.Y. May 22, 2018) (“If an individual opts out of a settlement, he no longer has standing to challenge the settlement.”). Accordingly, it is hereby: ORDERED that Competitor Plaintiffs’ conditional objection, (Doc. 1326), is DENIED for lack of standing.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to seal at Document 1328 is GRANTED.

SO ORDERED. Dated: May 26, 2021 New York, New York / on.

Vernon S. Broderick United States District Judge