Nunez

Nunez v. Bae Sys. San Diego Ship Repair Inc.

Good Law
292 F. Supp. 3d 1018
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaNovember 14, 2017Case No.: 16–CV–2162 JLS (NLS)California19,188 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Honsammartino, J.

Presently before the Court is Class Counsel's and Defendant BAE Systems San Diego Ship Repair, Inc.'s (collectively, the "Parties") Joint Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement ("Final Settlement Mot."). (ECF No. 46.) Because the Settlement is fundamentally fair, reasonable, and adequate, the Court GRANTS the Parties' Final Settlement Motion. Also before the Court is Class Counsel's Motion for Attorney's Fees, Costs, and Incentive Fees ("Fee Mot."). (ECF No. 47.) Given that the attorney's fees are set at the Ninth Circuit benchmark, and that the remaining fees and costs are reasonable, the Court GRANTS Class Counsel's Fee Motion. Finally, the Parties seek to replace the sole named Plaintiff Eduardo Nunez with another Class Member, arguing that by objecting to the Final Settlement, Nunez has a conflict of interest with the Class and can no longer serve as an adequate Class Representative. (Joint Motion for Substitution of Class Representative in Place of Eduardo Nunez ("Mot. to Substitute"). (ECF No. 37.) The Court GRANTS the Parties' Motion to Substitute and substitutes Plaintiff Bryan De Anda as the sole named Plaintiff.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Eduardo Nunez filed a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.