Bronson-v-Samsung Electronics America, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 30, 20203:18-cv-02300California3,660 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

9

10 ALEXIS BRONSON and CRYSTAL HARDIN, on behalf of themselves and all 11 others similarly situated, No. C 18-02300 WHA

12 Plaintiff,

13 v.

ORDER ON MOTION FOR

ATTORNEY'S FEES AND FOR 14 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS INC., and SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS ACTION SETTLEMENT 15 CO., LTD., 16 Defendants.

17 18 INTRODUCTION 19 In this class action certified under Rule 23(b)(2), plaintiff moves for final approval of a 20 settlement agreement and for attorney’s fees, costs, and incentive award. Defendant does not 21 oppose. To the extent stated below, the motion for final approval of the class settlement is 22 GRANTED. The motion for attorney’s fees, costs, and incentive award is GRANTED IN PART. 23 STATEMENT 24 Prior orders set forth the background of this action (see, e.g., Dkt. No. 230). In brief, 25 plaintiffs Alexis Bronson and Crystal Hardin purchased Samsung plasma televisions in 2013 26 that had…

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.