MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT. Plaintiffs Xxxxx Xxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxx Xxxxxxxxxx, Xxx Xxxx, Xxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxxxx Aeren Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx XxXxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxx Xxxxxxx, Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, Xxxx Xxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxx Xxxxxxx, Xxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxx Xxxx, Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxxx XxXxxx, Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx XxXxxxxx, and Xxxx Xxxxxxxx, and Defendant FCA US LLC (together, the “Parties”), by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby submit this proposed Stipulated Order for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement:
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT. “Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement” means a motion filed with the Court seeking entry of the Preliminary Approval Order.
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT. In determining whether to approve a proposed settlement, the District Court must find that the settlement is fair, adequate and reasonable. Xxxxxx v. American Home Shield Corp., 668 F.3d 1233, 1240 (11th Cir. 2011). A district court looks to six factors in determining whether a class action settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate: “(1) the likelihood of success at trial; (2) the range of possible recovery; (3) the range of possible recovery at which a settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable; (4) the anticipated complexity, expense, and duration of litigation; (5) the opposition to the settlement; and (6) the stage of proceedings at which the settlement was achieved.” Id.; see also Xxxxxxx v. HM Operating, Inc., 2016 WL 4398412, at *3 (N.D. Ala. Aug. 18, 2016). Furthermore, a court must consider the factors in Rule 23(e) which provides, among other things, that the crux of a court’s preliminary approval evaluation is whether “giving notice [to the class] is justified by the parties’ showing that the court will likely be able to: (i) approve the proposal under Rule 23(e)(2); and (ii) certify the class for purposes of judgment on the proposal,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(1)(B), and “focus[es]” a court’s inquiry on “the primary procedural considerations and substantive qualities that should always matter to the decision whether to approve the proposal,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(2) advisory committee’s note to 2018 amendment—that is, whether:
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT. The Court having considered Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval (the “Motion”) and accompanying materials, and being otherwise fully advised,
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT. THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Uncontested Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement. Having reviewed the Motion, the Settlement Agreement, the Declarations of Xxxxxx X. Xxxxx and Xxxx Xxxxxxxxxxx, and the record in this case, and for good cause shown: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND XXXXXXXX THAT:
