Judge Elaine Lu, Case Number: 22STCV09093, Date: 2025-04-15 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Elaine Lu, Case: 22STCV09093, Date: 2025-04-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV09093 Hearing Date: April 15, 2025 Dept: 9

Final Approval of Class Action Settlement

Department SSC-9

Seth v. Icon Burger Acquisition, LLC , et al.

Case No.: 22STCV09093

Hearing: April 15, 2025

TENTATIVE RULING

The Parties’ Motion for Final Approval of class action settlement is GRANTED as the settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable.

The essential terms are:

A. The Gross Settlement Amount (“GSA”) is $989,940, non-reversionary. (¶3.1)

B. The Net Settlement Amount (“Net”) is the GSA minus the following:

a. $329,947 (33 1/3%) for attorney fees to Class Counsel (¶3.2.2);

b. $14,886.34 for litigation costs to Class Counsel (Ibid.);

c. $5,000 for a Service Payment to the Named Plaintiff (¶3.2.1);

d. $19,610 for settlement administration costs (¶3.2.3); and

e. Payment of $18,750 (75% of $25,000 PAGA penalty) to the LWDA and $6,250 (25% of $25,000 PAGA penalty) to aggrieved employee. (¶3.2.5)

C. Employer’s share of the payroll taxes on the taxable portion of the settlement payments shall be paid separately from the GSA by Defendant. (¶4.1)

D. Plaintiffs’ release of Defendants from claims described herein.

No later than April 25, 2025, Plaintiff’s counsel shall file a single document that constitutes both a proposed Order and Judgment, consistent with this ruling containing all requisite terms, including the class definition, release language, and a statement of the number and identity of class members who requested exclusion.

By June 16, 2025, Class Counsel must give notice to the class members pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.771(b) (which may be effected by posting on the Administrator’s website if consistent with the parties’ Class Action Settlement) and to the LWDA, if applicable, pursuant to Labor Code §2699 (1)(3).

By August 17, 2026, Class Counsel must file a Final Report re: Distribution of the settlement funds.

The Court hereby sets a Non-Appearance Case Review for August 24, 2026, 8:30 a.m., Department 9.

BACKGROUND

This is a wage and hour class action. Defendants own and operate Smashburger restaurants, including at least 12 restaurants in California.

Plaintiff filed his class action lawsuit on March 14, 2022, alleging causes of action for unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime wages, failure to provide meal and rest breaks, wage statement violations, business expense reimbursements, and unfair competition.

Plaintiff filed a separate PAGA lawsuit on May 11, 2022, based on the same alleged Labor Code violations. Both matters were consolidated by stipulation on August 8, 2022.

Counsel represents that prior to mediation Defendants provided Plaintiff with informal discovery, including Plaintiff’s personnel, time, and payroll records, time records and payroll records for a randomly selected sampling of about 20% of the Class Members, wage statement exemplars, Defendants’ employee handbooks, including Defendants’ policies and procedures regarding the payment of wages, the provision of meal and rest breaks, timekeeping policies (including recording hours), issuance of wage statements, and termination wages, as well as information regarding the number of putative Class Members who are current and former employees, sample arbitration agreements, the number of Aggrieved Employees, the number of workweeks throughout the Class Period, and the number of pay periods throughout the PAGA Period.

On January 22, 2024, the Parties participated in an all-day mediation presided over by Todd Smith, Esq., which led to this Agreement to settle the Action. A fully executed copy of the Settlement Agreement was filed with the Court on April 15, 2024 attached to the Declaration Of Chad Saunders (“Saunders Decl.”) ISO Preliminary Approval, as Exhibit 1.

On July 9, 2024, the court issued a checklist of items for further briefing and continued preliminary approval. In response, on October 1, 2024, counsel filed a fully executed Amended Settlement Agreement attached to the Supplemental Declaration Of Chad Saunders (“Saunders Supp. Decl.”) ISO Preliminary Approval, as Exhibit 1.

On November 5, 2024, the court continued preliminary approval for further revisions. In response, on November 22, 2024, counsel filed a fully executed Amended Settlement Agreement attached to the Second Supplemental Declaration Of Chad Saunders (“Saunders 2^nd Supp. Decl.”) ISO Preliminary Approval, as Exhibit 1.

Preliminary Approval was granted on January 6, 2025. Notice was given to the Class Members as ordered. (See Declaration of Bryn Bridley (“Bridley Decl.”); Supplemental Declaration of Bryn Bridley (“Bridley Supp. Decl.”).)

Now before the Court is the motion for final approval of the settlement agreement.

CLASS DEFINITION AND ESSENTIAL TERMS OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

The essential terms are as follows:

· “Class” means all current and former non-exempt hourly employees employed by Defendants in California during the Class Period. (¶1.5)

o “Class Period” means the period from March 14, 2018 to September 1, 2024. (¶1.12)

· “Aggrieved Employee” means all current and former non-exempt hourly employees employed by Defendants in California during the PAGA Period. (¶1.4)

o “PAGA Period” means the period from March 14, 2021 to September 1, 2024. (¶1.32)

· Based on a review of its records to date, DEFENDANTS estimate there are 2,485 Class Members who collectively worked a total of 77,131 Workweeks as of September 1, 2024, and 1,175 Aggrieved Employees who worked a total 17,095 PAGA Pay Periods as of September 1, 2024. (¶4.1)

o The final Class List included 2,485 Class Members who worked 77,131 Workweeks during the Class Period, 1,175 of whom are also Aggrieved Employees who worked 17,095 PAGA Pay Periods. (Bridley Decl., ¶5.)

E. The Gross Settlement Amount (“GSA”) is $989,940, non-reversionary. (¶3.1)

F. The Net Settlement Amount (“Net”) ($596,243) is the GSA minus the following:

a. Up to $329,947 (33 1/3%) for attorney fees (¶3.2.2);

b. Up to $20,000 for litigation costs (Ibid.);

c. Up to $5,000 for a Service Payment to the Named Plaintiff (¶3.2.1);

d. Up to $20,000 for settlement administration costs (¶3.2.3); and

e. Payment of $18,750 (75% of $25,000 PAGA penalty) to the LWDA. (¶3.2.5)

G. Defendants will pay their share of taxes separate from the GSA. (¶4.3)

· There is no claim form requirement. (¶3.1)

· Funding of Settlement: Defendants shall fully fund the Gross Settlement Amount, and also fund the amounts necessary to fully pay Defendants’ share of payroll taxes by transmitting the funds to the Administrator no later than 30 days after the Effective Date. (¶4.3)

· Uncashed Settlement Checks: The face of each check shall prominently state the date (180 days after the date of mailing) when the check will be voided. The Administrator will cancel all checks not cashed by the void date. (¶4.4.1) For any Participating Class Member and/or Aggrieved Employee whose Individual Class Payment check or Individual PAGA Payment check is uncashed and cancelled after the void date, the Administrator shall transmit the funds represented by such checks to the California Controller's Unclaimed Property Fund in the name of the Class Member thereby leaving no “unpaid residue” subject to the requirements of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 384, subd. (b). (¶4.4.3)

The proposed settlement was submitted to the LWDA on April 15, 2024. (Saunders Decl. ISO Preliminary Approval, Exhibit 6.)

ANALYSIS OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

A. Does a presumption of fairness exist?

The Court preliminarily found in its Order on January 6, 2025 that the presumption of fairness should be applied. No facts have come to the Court’s attention that would alter that preliminary conclusion. Accordingly, the settlement is entitled to a presumption of fairness as set forth in the preliminary approval order.

B. Is the settlement fair, adequate, and reasonable?

The settlement was preliminarily found to be fair, adequate and reasonable. Notice has now been given to the Class and the LWDA.

Reaction of the class members to the proposed settlement.

Number of class members: 2,485 (Bridley Decl., ¶5.)

Number of notice packets mailed: 2,485 (Bridley Supp. Decl., ¶4.)

Number of undeliverable notices: 146 (Id. at ¶¶4-5.)

Number of opt-outs: 1 (Id. at ¶6.)

Number of objections: 0 (Ibid.)

Number of participating class members: 2,484 (Bridley Decl., ¶5.)

Average individual payment: $239.64 (Id. at ¶14.)

Highest estimated payment: $2,608.57 (Ibid.)

Lowest estimated payment: $7.72 (Ibid.)

Number of Aggrieved Employees: 1,175 (Id. at ¶5.)

Average PAGA payment: $5.42 (Id. at ¶14.)

Highest estimated PAGA payment: $33.27 (Ibid.)

Lowest estimated PAGA payment: $.37 (Ibid.)

The Court finds that the notice was given as directed and conforms to due process requirements. Given the reactions of the Class Members and the LWDA to the proposed settlement and for the reasons set for in the Preliminary Approval order, the settlement is found to be fair, adequate, and reasonable.

C. Attorney Fees and Costs

Class Counsel request $329,947.00 (33%) in fees and litigation costs and expenses in the amount of $14,886.34 to Class Counsel. (Motion ISO Final: 1:25-28.) The Settlement provides for attorney's fees up to $329,947 and costs of $20,000 (Settlement Agreement, ¶3.2.2); the class was provided notice of the requested awards and none objected. (Bridley Supp. Decl., ¶6; Brindley Decl., Exhibit A.)

“Courts recognize two methods for calculating attorney fees in civil class actions: the lodestar/multiplier method and the percentage of recovery method.” (Wershba at 254.) Here, class counsel requests attorney fees using the percentage method, as cross checked by lodestar. (Motion ISO Final, pgs. 13-21.)

The fee request represents 33% of the gross settlement amount which is the average generally awarded in class actions. See In re Consumer Privacy Cases (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 545, 558, fn. 13 (“Empirical studies show that, regardless whether the percentage method or the lodestar method is used, fee awards in class actions average around one-third of the recovery.”).

Counsel has provided the following lodestar information:

								TOTAL
Biller	Z.C	J.S	B.B	C.S	B. H	K.B	K.D
Hours	55.7	71.8	12.9	105.6	22.3	2.7	12.9	283.9
Rate	$850	$750	$750	$750	$600	$650	$900	--
Lodestar	$47,345	$53,850	$9,675	$79,200	$13,380	$1,755	$11,610	$216,905

(Saunders Decl. ISO Final Approval, ¶36 and Exhibit 2 thereto.)

Therefore, Counsel represents that 283.9 hours were incurred for a total lodestar of $216,905, which requires a multiplier of 1.52 to yield the requested fee amount. (Id. at ¶¶28-36.)

As for costs, class counsel has incurred costs of $14,886.34. (Saunders Decl. ISO Final, ¶39.) Class Counsel is requesting $14,886.34 in costs, which is less than the settlement cap of $20,000. The costs in this case include, but are not limited to, filing and service fees ($1,277.40), Expert costs ($2,900), case anywhere costs ($1,112.85), and mediation ($9,375). (Ibid.).

Based on the above, the Court hereby awards attorney fees in the requested amount of $329,947.00 and costs in the requested amount of $14,886.34.

D. Incentive Award to Class Representative

The Settlement agreement provides for up to $5,000 an incentive award for the Named Plaintiff. (Settlement Agreement, ¶3.2.1.)

Plaintiff Seth’s contributions to this litigation include, but are not limited to spending 20 hours on the following: obtaining counsel, meeting with counsel, gathering documents, reviewing documents, answering questions, and reviewing the settlement agreement. (Seth Decl., ¶8.)

Based on the above, the Court hereby awards an enhancement award in the amount of $5,000.

E. Claims Administration Costs

The claims administrator requests $19,610 for the costs of administering the settlement. (Bridley Decl., ¶17.) This is less than the $20,000 maximum amount estimated in the Settlement Agreement; (Settlement Agreement, ¶3.2.3); and disclosed in the notice to class members. Based on all the work performed by the Claims Administrator, the Court hereby awards costs in the requested amount of $19,610.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER