Motion for Final Approval - Chimeno

Comentarios

Transcripción

Motion for Final Approval - Chimeno
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 1 of 16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
ANAMARIA CHIMENO-BUZZI, and
LAKEDRICK REED, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
HOLLISTER CO., and ABERCROMBIE &
FITCH CO.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 14-cv-23120-MGC
Hon. Marcia G. Cooke, Presiding
Hon. Magistrate Edwin G. Torres
MOTION TO APPROVE FINAL CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT;
INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW
Plaintiffs Anamaria Chimeno-Buzzi and Lakedrick Reed, on behalf of themselves and as
representatives of the Class, hereby move for final approval of the class action settlement filed in
this matter, and respectfully request that the court enter a final Order and Judgment. On December
18, 2015, the Court issued an Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement
(D.E. 129) (“Preliminary Approval Order”), preliminarily approving (i) the Settlement Agreement
(the “Agreement”) dated September 10, 2015 (see D.E. 126-1 to 126-5); (ii) the Supplement to the
Agreement (see D.E. 127 and 127-1), and (iii) the affidavit of the Settlement Administrator (see D.E.
128 to 128-7).
For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiffs and their counsel respectfully request that the
Court certify the Settlement Class, declare the terms of the settlement to be fair, reasonable, and
adequate, and enter the parties’ proposed Final Order and Judgment.
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 2 of 16
I.
INTRODUCTION
The compromise of complex class action litigation is encouraged by the courts and favored
by public policy, especially where, as here, there is significant value to affected class members. See In
re Checking Account Overdraft Litigation, 2011 WL 5873389, 6 (S.D. Fla. 2011) (“Federal courts have
long recognized a strong policy and presumption in favor of class action settlements.”); 4 Newberg
on Class Actions § 11:41 (4th ed.).
The cornerstone of the Agreement here is the Common Fund of Ten Million Dollars
($10,000,000), which will be used to pay approved claims filed by Settlement Class Members1 after
deducting the court-approved costs of notice, administration, service awards and reasonable
attorneys’ fees. The Agreement further requires the Defendants to institute Telephone Consumer
Protect Act (“TCPA”) compliance training for key marketing managers who oversee the
Defendants’ text marketing program, thereby helping to prevent any future violations from
occurring going forward. This relief is substantial, concrete and equitable.
Pursuant to the Agreement and the Preliminary Approval Order, Epiq Systems, Inc., an
experienced and reputable class action settlement administrator, presided over the claims
administration process and has (i) provided direct notice to all class members who could be
identified; (ii) implemented an internet advertising campaign to reach additional members; (iii)
established a settlement website (www.aftcpasettlement.com) and promoted the website on popular
search engines, (iv) established a toll free information line to disseminate information about the
Agreement, and (v) managed an on-going process for collecting Claim Forms. See Declaration of
Cameron Azari, Esq. of Epiq Systems, Inc., filed concurrently herewith as Exhibit “A” (the “Azari
Decl.”).
The contentious history of this litigation, and the extensive, mediated negotiations over the
1
Unless defined otherwise, capitalized terms are defined in Section II of the Agreement.
2
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 3 of 16
terms of the settlement, ensures that the Agreement is free from collusion and is imminently fair and
reasonable. See Lucas v. Kmart Corp., 234 F.R.D. 688, 693 (D. Colo. 2006) (finding that where a
settlement results from “arm’s length negotiations between experienced counsel after significant
discovery ha[s] occurred,” the Court may presume the settlement to be fair, adequate, and
reasonable); see also Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement
(“Preliminary Approval Motion”), p.3-6 (DE 126).
To date, the response to the Agreement has been overwhelmingly positive. No Settlement
Class Members object and no state or federal governments seek to intervene. 2 In fact, over 100,000
Class Members have voiced their support for the Settlement by submitting Claims Forms, and the
deadline is still not until May 16, 2016 (on average the Settlement Administrator has received 10,196
Claims per week since the dissemination of the Notice commenced). (Azari Decl. at ¶ 40.)
Absent a settlement, the resolution of this Litigation through the trial process would likely
have entailed many more years of protracted adversary litigation and appeals, which would have
substantially delayed relief to Settlement Class Members.
Moreover, the settlement avoids
incremental litigation of these claims on an individual basis. Considering the extensive monetary
and non-monetary benefits under the Agreement, the Court should determine that it is fair and
reasonable and merits final approval.
II.
THE BEST PRACTICAL NOTICE WAS PROVIDED TO THE SETTLEMENT
CLASS
The fundamental purpose of class notice is to “afford members of the class due process
which, in the context of the Rule 23(b)(3) class action, guarantees the opportunity to be excluded
from the class action and not be bound by any subsequent judgment.” Peters v. National R.R.
Although two purported Settlement Class Members submitted meritless objections to the
Agreement (D.E. 134 and 136), both of those Objections were withdrawn (D.E. 143, 144) after
Class Counsel filed a detailed response to the Objections (D.E. 138) and commenced discovery
(D.E. 137).
2
3
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 4 of 16
Passenger Corp., 966 F.2d 1483, 1480 (D.C. Cir. 1992) (citing Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 US 156,
173-74 (1974)). Here, the notice plan ordered by the Court has been effectuated in compliance with
the Court’s Preliminary Approval Order. (Azari Decl. at ¶¶ 13-41.)
A.
Dissemination of the Notice
Notice to the Class was disseminated via direct e-mail and U.S. Mail to all Class Members
that could be identified, and via publication of a Summary Notice and an Internet campaign. (Azari
Decl. ¶¶ 13-37).
Prior to mailing the Notice, the Settlement Administrator updated the notice mailing list
through the USPS National Change of Address (“NCOA”) database and through a professional
address location service. As required by the Court, any Notice Packets returned as undeliverable
were re-sent if forwarding or additional addresses were ascertainable In addition, in compliance with
the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”), including 28 U.S.C. §§ 1715(a) and (b), and the
Agreement, the Settlement Administrator provided notice of this settlement via certified mail to all
the appropriate state and federal government officials. The Settlement Administrator continues to
maintain the Settlement Website and a call center, accessed via a toll-free number listed in the
Notice Packet. The Website and toll-free number will be operational until the settlement is fully
consummated. (Id. at ¶¶ 13-37, 41.)
B.
Content of the Notice
Rule 23(e) (1) provides: “[t]he court must direct notice in a reasonable manner to all class
members who would be bound by the [settlement] proposal.” This standard is met where “the
notice of settlement [is] sufficiently detailed to permit class members to determine the potential
costs and benefits involved, or at least whether additional investigation into the matter would be an
efficient use of their time.” See Petrovic v. Amoco Oil Co., 200 F.3d 1140, 1153 (8th Cir. 1999). Due
process is satisfied when notice describes “the substantive claims . . . [and] contained information
4
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 5 of 16
reasonably necessary to make a decision to remain a class member and be bound by the final
judgment.” See In re Nissan Motor Corp. Antitrust Litig., 552 F.2d 1088, 1104-05 (5th Cir. 1977).
The Mailed Notice sent to Settlement Class Members and appearing on the settlement
website3 were substantially the same in all material respects to the notice that was approved by the
Court in its Preliminary Approval Order. (Azari Decl. at ¶¶ 28-30, 44-46, Attachment 2 (Summary
Notice and Claim Form sent via U.S. Mail), Attachment 3 (the Long Form Notice), Attachment 4
(the E-mail Notice), Attachments 5 & 6 (the Publication Notice), Attachment 7 (the Banner
Advertisements), and Attachments 8 & 9 (the Sponsored Search Listings).
The Mailed Notice was formatted to be similar in style and of a similar approach to the class
notice models available on the Federal Judicial Center’s (“FJC”) website, www.fjc.gov.4 The notice
mailed to each Settlement Class Member and appearing on the settlement website described, among
other things: the nature of the case, the Settlement Class definition, and the claims and defenses; the
possibility to appear with counsel; the timing and place to object; the Final Approval Hearing
location, date and time; the stakes involved; that Settlement Class Members would be bound and
how they would be bound; the amount of the Common Fund and the amount of Settlement Class
Members potential payments; the amount of attorneys’ fees and incentive awards which would be
requested; what was required to participate in the settlement; how to opt out and the effect of doing
so; and where to call (toll-free) to get more information. (Id.)
In light of the foregoing, the notice met or exceeded the requirements of due process and
Rule 23(e). (Id. at ¶¶ 10-12, 42-43.) As such, this Court has personal jurisdiction over all of the
3
https://www.aftcpasettlement.com/Content/Documents/Notice.pdf.
As the Manual on Complex Litigation notes: “The FJC has tested the form notices for
comprehension and identified some principles that will be of value to those drafting such notices.” Herr,
David, Manual Complex Lit. § 21.3, p. 286, n 880 (4h Ed.). See generally, In re Wireless Facilities, Inc., Securities
Litigation II, 253 F.R.D. 607 (S.D. Cal. 2008) (setting forth settlement notice with approval); S.S. v. New York
City Dept. of Educ., 255 F.R.D. 59 (E.D.N.Y. 2008) (same).
4
5
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 6 of 16
Settlement Class Members. See In re Checking Account Overdraft Litigation, 2011 WL 5873389, 6 (S.D.
Fla. 2011); David v. American Suzuki Motor Corp., 2010 WL 1628362, 2 (S.D. Fla. 2010); Perez v.
Asurion Corp., 501 F.Supp.2d 1360, 1377 (S.D. Fla. 2007) (same).
III.
THE SETTLEMENT IS FAIR, REASONABLE AND ADEQUATE
A.
Judicial Policy Favors Settlement of Class Actions
Courts analyzing class-action settlements are guided by “the strong judicial policy favoring
settlements as well as the realization that compromise is the essence of settlement.” In re Checking
Account Overdraft Litigation, 2011 WL 5873389, *6 (S.D. Fla. 2011) (citations omitted); see LiPuma v.
American Express Co., 406 F. Supp. 2d 1298, 1314 (S.D. Fla. 2005); Behrens v. Wometco Enterprises, Inc.,
118 F.R.D. 534, 538 (S.D. Fla. 1988) (“Settlement has special importance in class actions with their
notable uncertainty, difficulties of proof, and length. Settlements of complex cases contribute
greatly to the efficient utilization of scarce judicial resources, and achieve the speedy resolution of
justice .… Litigants should be encouraged to determine their respective rights between themselves.”)
(citations omitted)).
A proponent of a proposed settlement need not ‘justify each term of settlement against a
hypothetical or speculative measure of what concessions might [be] gained.” Ass'n for Disabled Ams.,
Inc. v. Amoco, Oil Co., 211 F.R.D. 457, 468 (S.D. Fla. 2002) (citatation omitted)); Amoco, 211 F.R.D.
at 466-68 (“Above all, the court must be mindful that ‘inherent in compromise is a yielding of
absolutes and an abandoning of highest hopes’” and that there exists “an overriding public interest
in favor of settlement, particularly in class actions that have the well-deserved reputation of being
most complex.”) (citation omitted)).
Moreover, where, as here, the settlement previously has been preliminarily approved,
garnered no objectors, and was the result of arm’s-length negotiations occurring after extensive
litigation, the settlement is entitled to a presumption of fairness and reasonableness. See In re Am.
6
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 7 of 16
Investors Life Ins. Co. Annuity Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., 263 F.R.D. 226, 239 (ED Pa. 2009) (lack of
objectors); Lucas v. Kmart Corp., 234 F.R.D. 688, 693 (D. Colo. 2006) (presumption of fairness where
settlement results from “arm’s length negotiations between experienced counsel after significant
discovery ha[s] occurred”).
B.
The Settlement is Fair, Reasonable and Adequate
To approve a class-action settlement, the Court must find it to be “fair, adequate, and
reasonable.” Access Now, Inc. v. Claire's Stores, Inc., 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21481, 2002 WL 1162422
(S.D. Fla. 2001); Bennett v. Behring Corp., 737 F.2d 982, 986 (11th Cir. 1984). In determining whether
a proposed class action settlement is fair, adequate and reasonable, courts in the Eleventh Circuit
interpret and apply the following six factors:5 (1) the likelihood of success at trial; (2) the range of
possible recovery; (3) the point on or below the range of possible recovery at which a settlement is
fair, adequate and reasonable; (4) the complexity, expense and duration of litigation; (5) the
substance and amount of opposition to the settlement; and (6) the stage of proceedings at which the
settlement was achieved.” Borcea v. Carnival Corp. 238 F.R.D. 664, 672 -673 (S.D. Fla. 2006) (citing
Bennett v. Behring Corp., 737 F.2d 982, 986 (11th Cir.1984)).
Courts have emphasized that the above factors should not be applied in a formalistic
fashion, Whitford v. First Nationwide Bank, 147 F.R.D. 135, 140 (W.D. Ky. 1992). “In evaluating these
considerations, the Court must not try the case on the merits.” Amoco, 3211 F.R.D. at 467 (citation
omitted). “In addition, the judgment of experienced counsel is relevant to approval.” Borcea, 238
F.R.D. at 672-73. Applying those standards here, the Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate.
5
These fairness factors are sometimes referred to as the “Bennett factors” because they are
taken from the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in Bennett v. Behring Corp., 737 F.2d 982 (11th Cir.1984).
See, e.g., Perez v. Asurion Corp, 501 F.Supp.2d 1360 (S.D. Fla. 2007); Access Now, Inc. v. Cunard Line
Ltd., Co., 2001 WL 1622015, 2 (S.D. Fla. 2001).
7
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 8 of 16
1.
The Settlement is the Result of Arm’s-Length Negotiations and HardFought Litigation After Significant Discovery
This was anything but a “file and settle” case. See David v. American Suzuki Motor Corp., 2010
WL 1628362, at *6 (S.D. Fla. 2010). The Agreement was reached only after contentious and
extensive litigation, including discovery, and extensive negotiations, all of which gave the parties
sufficient information to evaluate their respective, diverse positions adequately and realistically. See
Francisco v. Numismatic Guaranty Corp. of America, 2008 WL 649124, 11 (S.D. Fla. 2008) (collecting
cases).
The record demonstrates that the Parties pursued their opposing positions comprehensively
and zealously. In support of preliminary approval of the settlement, Plaintiffs submitted briefs and
evidence outlining the extensive litigation which has ensued from the filing of the original Complaint
in August of 2014, through and including the mediation process ending in settlement, which was
conducted at arm’s-length and was adversarial.6 The fact that Parties who fervently opposed each
other overcame their differences with assistance from an experienced mediator underscores the
point that the Settlement was anything but collusive.7
As detailed in previous filings and the Court’s record, the Parties engaged the services of the
Honorable Wayne R. Anderson (Ret.), an experienced and skilled mediator, who, after in person
mediation, assisted the Parties to reach the Settlement. By the time such settlement discussions
See D.E. 126 at 3-6 (Preliminary Approval Motion); see also e.g. D.E. 126-2 at ¶¶ 12-17
(Declaration of Robert Ahdoot in Support of Preliminary Approval). Also, the Parties’ settlement
was reached without any discussion or agreement on attorney’s fees, which demonstrates a
“commitment to arms-length negotiations.” Manchaca v. Chater, 927 F. Supp. 962, 966 (E.D. Tex.
1996).
6
See, e.g., Adams v. Inter-Con Sec. Sys., Inc., No. C-06-5428 MHP, 2007 WL 3225466, at *3 (N.D.
Cal. Oct. 30, 2007) (“The assistance of an experienced mediator in the settlement process confirms
that the settlement is non-collusive.”); In re Indep. Energy Holdings PLC, No. 00 Civ. 6689 (SAS), 2003
WL 22244676, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 29, 2003) (“The fact that the settlement was reached after
exhaustive arm’s-length negotiations, with the assistance of a private mediator experienced in
complex litigation, is further proof that it is fair and reasonable”).
7
8
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 9 of 16
occurred, Class Counsel and Defendants’ Counsel, who are experienced in prosecuting complex
class action claims such as these, had reviewed over 20,000 pages of written discovery and thus had
“a clear view of the strengths and weaknesses” of their case and were in a strong position to make
an informed decision regarding the reasonableness of a potential settlement. See In re Warner
Commc’ns Sec. Litig., 618 F. Supp. 735, 745 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) aff’d, 798 F.2d 35 (2d Cir. 1986).
In the context of this case and the settlement discussions set forth above, the settlement is
the product of negotiations among well-informed counsel who fought fervently for their respective
clients’ diametrically opposed positions.
2.
This Settlement Avoids Complex, Lengthy and Expensive Litigation
Although the Parties were prepared to try this case, they were well aware that further
litigation would be expensive, complex, and time-consuming.
Absent a settlement, the final
resolution of this litigation would have required several more years of protracted adversarial
litigation and appeals, which would have substantially delayed any relief to the Settlement Class
Members.
The proof necessary to prevail at trial in this case would be greater than what is required
under the Agreement. It is clearly advantageous for Settlement Class Members to now be eligible to
obtain this significant monetary relief without further delay or extensive proofs. By reaching this
settlement, the Parties will avoid further protracted litigation and will establish a means for prompt,
streamlined resolution of Settlement Class Members’ claims against Defendants with relaxed
burdens of proof. Given the alternative of long and complex litigation before this Court, the risks
involved, the potential evidentiary issues, and the possibility of further appellate review, the prompt
relief afforded by the Agreement is highly beneficial to Settlement Class Members. See Lipuma, 406
F. Supp. 2d at 1324 (approving settlement that would “‘alleviate the need for judicial exploration of
these complex subjects, reduce litigation cost, and eliminate the significant risk that individual
9
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 10 of 16
claimants might recover nothing’”) (citation omitted).
3.
The Settlement Is Fair, Reasonable and Adequate In Light of the
Possible Range of Recovery and the View of Experienced Counsel
Class Counsel here have extensive experience in class litigation. (See DE 101 (Motion to
Appoint Interim Co-Lead Counsel)). Given the risks of potential recovery weighed against the
benefits of the proposed Agreement, undersigned counsel believe the Settlement is fair and
reasonable for a number of reasons, especially the substantial monetary benefits afforded to
Settlement Class Members. See Francisco, 2008 WL 649124, *12 (“Counsel's conclusions that the
Settlement is fair, adequate and reasonable provides strong evidence that the settlement merits the
Court's approval.”) (citations omitted)).
First, under the Settlement, Defendants agreed to establish a Common Fund for the
Settlement Class in the amount of $10 million to compensate Settlement Class Members who
received unsolicited and unauthorized spam texts. The Settlement further requires that Defendants
implement TCPA compliance training for key marketing personnel.
Second, the Settlement makes relief obtainable through submission of the Court-approved
Claim Form in a streamlined claims process in which Settlement Class Members have a lesser
burden and standard of proof than would be required in a court proceeding. Unlike a federal court
trial, this entire claims process under the Settlement will not be subject to the myriad requirements
of the Federal Rules of Evidence or Civil Procedure. The agreed claims process exists to satisfy the
claims of any and all Settlement Class Members who step forward and submit a qualifying claim. It
is straightforward and uncomplicated.
Class Counsel reasonably concluded that this claims process is appropriate. Settlement Class
Members may enter information on the settlement website and download a customized Claim Form
and a toll-free number appears in the Mailed Notice, the Claim Form, and on-line to facilitate claims
10
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 11 of 16
and communications with Settlement Class Members.8 See Schulte v. Fifth Third Bank, 2011 WL
3269340, 24 (N.D. Ill. 2011) (approving use of claims forms and finding parties' use of a settlement
website and toll free number encourages the filing of claims).
To further facilitate claims submission, the Agreement also contains a “cure” provision
(Azari Decl., Attachment 1, Settlement Administrator’s Protocol at ¶18) that requires a conference
among the Parties in the event of a disputed claim and which requires the Settlement Administrator
to resolve technical deficiencies in claims submissions by notifying Settlement Class Members and
allowing them to re-submit forms or otherwise correct submissions. The claims process called for
under the Settlement is and will be entirely transparent to Class Counsel and the Defendant.
Settlement Class Members may submit claims through May 16, 2016 and continue to do so
at a steady pace. Since the inception of the Notice until the week ending March 18, 2016, on
average, 10,196 Class Members submit Claims each week. To date, the reaction of the Class vis a vis
submission of a Claim Forms has been exemplary. Over 100,000 Class Members have already
submitted forms. (Azari Decl. at ¶40.)
Third, in light of the uncertainties of this Action especially as it relates to damages, the
settlement provides a substantial, concrete monetary benefit much faster and easier than would
otherwise be the case absent the Settlement. Indeed, Class Counsel entered into the Settlement
Agreement in the face of significant litigation risks, which persist to this day. For instance, in April
2015, eight months into this case, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., 742
F.3d 409 (9th Cir. 2014) cert. granted, 135 S. Ct. 1892 (2015), a case in which the Court will consider
whether an alleged violation of a statutory right created by Congress, without more, confers on a
plaintiff Article III standing to sue in federal court. Given that the damages sought by the Plaintiffs
Azari Decl. at ¶¶ 33-37; see also https://www.aftcpasettlement.com/Request (online claim
form) and https://www.aftcpasettlement.com/Content/Documents/Claim%20Form.pdf (pdf claim
form available for download).
8
11
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 12 of 16
in this case were purely statutory in nature, a broad decision in favor of the petitioners in Spokeo
could have easily extinguished Plaintiffs’ and the Settlement Class Members’ Article III standing in
federal court, leaving them without any chance of recovery. The pendency of Spokeo thus concerned
Class Counsel a great deal, and was a major factor motivating Class Counsel’s decision to enter into
the Settlement Agreement. Even assuming the risk of an adverse decision in Spokeo (and the inherent
risks associated with class certification) did not exist, Plaintiffs would surely have recovered nothing
had they blindly pressed this case for anywhere near the maximum possible recovery they could have
recovered at trial. Bankruptcy is not the preferred outcome of class action practice. The Settlement
reached by Class Counsel ensures that the class will receive fair, adequate, reasonable, and meaningful
relief. It is an excellent result by any measure.
Fourth, in agreeing to the settlement, Defendants made a number of other significant
concessions constituting additional benefits to Settlement Class Members, including: the $10,000,000
Settlement Fund; implementing TCPA compliance training; foregoing any right to appeal class
certification; liability determinations; and agreeing to provide notice to Settlement Class Members of
an opportunity for recovery – in the absence of which Settlement Class Members would have no
way of knowing about potential rights they may have been able to assert with respect to the claims in
this Action.
4.
The Proposed Settlement Has Been Very Well Received
“In determining whether a proposed settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate, the reaction
of the class is an[other] important [Bennett] factor.” Lipuma, 406 F.Supp.2d 1298, 1324.
A low percentage of objections demonstrates the reasonableness of a settlement.
Conversely, a high percentage of objections indicates that a class action settlement may very well not
be fair and reasonable. Id.
Here, the Court-approved notice program set out a very specific procedure for Settlement
12
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 13 of 16
Class Members to file an objection to the proposed settlement. Only two alleged Class Members
objected to the Settlement, and after the filing of an Opposition and the commencement of
discovery by Plaintiffs, the parties met and conferred and the objectors withdrew their objections
before discovery began. Not a single Settlement Class Member has sought to intervene. Likewise,
no state or federal governmental authority filed objections or moved to intervene. Courts have
found that such lack of opposition weighs strongly in favor of the settlement.9
5.
Final Class Certification is Warranted
Plaintiffs seek final certification of the same Settlement Class as the one the Court
conditionally certified in its Preliminary Approval Oder. (DE 129 at ¶ 4.) In their preliminary
approval memorandum, Plaintiffs set forth the reasons why certification of a settlement class is
warranted. Those arguments and citations are incorporated herein and do not bear reiteration.
Suffice it to say that class treatment in a settlement context makes sense. In this case, the Court
should “consider whether the class members would be aware of their rights” absent class
certification, and also ‘the improbability that large numbers of class members would possess the
initiative to litigate individually.’” Fabricant, 202 F.R.D. 310, 318 (citation omitted).
Class actions are meant to promote “economies of time, effort and expense, assuring
uniformity and avoiding repetitive actions.” Id. The fact that the Parties have reached a settlement
9
See In re Dennis Greenman Sec. Litig., 622 F. Supp. 1430, 1442 (S.D. Fla. 1985); D'Amato v.
Deutsche Bank, 236 F.3d 78, 86-87 (2d Cir. 2001); In re Cendant Corp. Sec. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 235 (3d
Cir. 2001) ("The District Court correctly found that [the small number of objectors] weighed
strongly in favor of the Settlement."); Stoetzner v. United States Steel Corp., 897 F.2d 115, 118-19 (3d
Cir. 1990) (concluding that when “only” 29 members of a 281 person class [i.e., 10% of the class]
objected, the response of the class as a whole “strongly favors [the] settlement”); Elkins v. Equitable
Life Ins. of Iowa, No. CIVA96-296-CIV-7-17B, 1998 WL 133741, at *28 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 1998)
(“[t]here have been only six objections received from a Class of approximately 109,000 policy
owners, which is a de minimus number” relative to the size of the class); Access Now, Inc., No. 0014017-CIV, 2002 WL 1162422 (S.D. Fla. May 7, 2002) (“The Court notes that in several recent Title
III of the ADA class actions in this district which were similarly noticed, the Department of Justice
and several state attorneys general filed objections. This has not been the case in this matter. The
fact that no objections have been filed strongly favors approval of the settlement.”).
13
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 14 of 16
weighs in favor of a finding that the class mechanism is superior. The Newberg treatise explains that
in some cases a “Class might not have been certified were it not for the proposed class settlement.
This observation does not mean that Rule 23 criteria were not applied strictly in these circumstances.
On the contrary, these tests were applied, and the observation that a different ruling might have
resulted in the absence of the settlement offer refers to the fact that Rule 23 criteria would have
been applied in a different context and thus might have led to a different result.” 4 Newberg §11.27
at 56 (footnote omitted).
This case involves over 100,000 claims submitted by individuals who received allegedly
unsolicited text messages are thus owed money pursuant to the TCPA. Resolving the claims of this
Action through a settlement class is clearly a superior method for handling the claims of Plaintiffs
and all Settlement Class Members.
IV.
CONCLUSION
For all of the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiffs and Class Counsel believe they have crafted a
settlement that is beyond adequate, fair and reasonable, and that should be approved.
Dated: March 23, 2016
Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ David P. Milian
David P. Milian
[email protected]
Frank S. Hedin
[email protected]
CAREY RODRIGUEZ
MILIAN GONYA, LLP
1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 700
Miami, Florida 33131
Telephone: (305) 372-7474
Facsimile: (305) 372-7475
Robert Ahdoot*
[email protected]
AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
14
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 15 of 16
1016 Palm Avenue
West Hollywood, California 90069
Tel: 310.474.9111
Fax: 310.474.8585
Joseph J. Siprut*
[email protected]
Ismael T. Salam
[email protected]
SIPRUT PC
17 North State Street
Suite 1600
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Phone: 312.236.0000
Fax: 312.241.1260
Proposed Settlement Class
Scott D. Owens
[email protected]
Patrick C. Crotty
[email protected]
SCOTT D. OWENS, P.A.
3800 S. Ocean Drive, Ste. 235
Hollywood, FL 33019
Tel: 954.589.0588
Fax: 954.337.0666
Liaison Counsel
*Admitted Pro Hac Vice
15
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 16 of 16
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on March 23, 2016, I electronically filed the foregoing document with
the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this
day on all counsel of record identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF.
/s/David P. Milian
16
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 1 of 67
EXHIBIT A
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 2 of 67
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
ANAMARIA CHIMENO-BUZZI, and
LAKEDRICK REED, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
HOLLISTER CO.; and ABERCROMBIE &
FITCH.,
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R.
AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION
OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
CASE NO. 14-CV-23120-MGC
Defendants.
I, CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., hereby declare and state as follows:
1.
My name is Cameron R. Azari, Esq. I am over the age of twenty-one and I have
personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein, and I believe them to be true and correct.
2.
I am a nationally recognized expert in the field of legal notice and I have served as a
legal notice expert in dozens of federal and state cases involving class action notice plans.
3.
I am the Director of Legal Notice for Hilsoft Notifications (“Hilsoft”), a firm that
specializes in designing, developing, analyzing and implementing large-scale, un-biased, legal
notification plans. Hilsoft has been involved with some of the most complex and significant notices
and notice programs in recent history. Hilsoft is a business unit of Epiq Systems Class Action and
Claims Solutions (“ECA”).
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 3 of 67
4.
In the Anamaria Chimeno-Buzzi & Lakedrick Reed v. Hollister Co. & Abercrombie &
Fitch Co., Case No. 14-cv-23120-MGC litigation, my colleagues and I were asked to design the
Settlement Notices and a Notice Program (or “Notice Plan”) to inform Settlement Class Members
about their rights under the Settlement. In the “Declaration of Cameron R. Azari, Esq. on Settlement
Notices Plan and Notices” dated November 10, 2015 (filed as Docket Entry Number (“DE”) 128), I
detailed Hilsoft’s class action notice experience and attached Hilsoft’s curriculum vitae. I also
provided my educational and professional experience relating to class actions and my ability to
render opinions on the overall adequacy of notice programs.
5.
ECA has administered the Settlement1 in this Action pursuant to terms and conditions
set forth in the Settlement Administrator’s Protocol included here as Attachment 1 and incorporated
herein by this reference, and the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement.
6.
I have reviewed the Settlement Agreement and Supplement to the Settlement
Agreement. Hilsoft and ECA have abided by the obligations of the Settlement Agreement, the
Supplement to the Settlement Agreement, and the Orders issued by the Court. The Settlement
Agreement, and the Supplement to the Settlement Agreement, and any exhibits or attachments
thereto, shall collectively be referred to herein as the “Settlement Agreement.” Hilsoft and ECA
have executed a non-disclosure and confidentiality agreement with respect to any information
1
Unless otherwise defined, all capitalized terms herein shall have the same force, meaning and
effect as ascribed in Section II (entitled “Definitions”) of the Settlement Agreement filed by the
Parties on September 10, 2015 (as ECF Docket 126-1) in Anamaria Chimeno-Buzzi, et al. v.
Hollister Co., et al., Case No. 14-cv-23120-MGC (S.D. Fla.), including all exhibits and addenda
thereto.
2
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 4 of 67
relating to the Class Members.
7.
This declaration will detail the successful implementation of the Notice Plan and
reaffirm that the Notice Plan was comprehensive, well suited to the Class and conformed to the
standards that courts and jurisprudence require. The declaration will also report on administrative
activity to date. The facts in this declaration are based upon what I personally know, as well as
information provided to me in the ordinary course of my business by my colleagues at Hilsoft and
ECA.
OVERVIEW
8.
On December 18, 2015, the Court appointed ECA as the Settlement and Notice
Administrator. The Court also approved the Notice Program (“Notice Plan” or “Plan”) and notices
(the “Notice” or “Notices”) designed by Hilsoft. With the Court’s approval, and according to the
Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement (the “Order”), Hilsoft began to
implement each element of the Notice Program.
9.
To date, the Notice Plan has been implemented as ordered by the Court, including
dissemination of individual notice to Class Members via postal mail or email, consumer publication
ad and banner ads. Internet sponsored listings and a case website have provided additional notice
exposures.
10.
The measureable media effort of the Notice Program reached approximately 80.0% of
Settlement Class Members.2 In my experience, the reach of the Notice Plan is consistent with other
2
Reach is defined as the percentage of a class exposed to notice, net of any duplication among
people who may have been exposed more than once. Notice exposure is defined as the opportunity
to see a notice.
3
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 5 of 67
court-approved notice programs, and met due process requirements.
11.
All notice documents were designed to be noticeable, clear, simple, substantive, and
informative, with plain language statements regarding Class Members’ legal rights and options. The
Notices alerted Class Members that the content may affect them.
No significant or required
information was missing.
12.
Class.
In my opinion, the Notice Program fairly and adequately covered and notified the
It is also my opinion that the Notice Plan was the best notice practicable under the
circumstances of this case and satisfied the requirements of due process, including its “desire to
actually inform” requirement.3
NOTICE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
13.
The Order defines the “Settlement Class” as “all persons in the United States who
received one (1) or more text messages sent by or on behalf of Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.,
Hollister Co., Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Gilly Hicks, and / or abercrombie kids, between August 25,
2010 and the date of the issuance of the Preliminary Approval Order.” Specifically excluded from
the Settlement Class are the Defendants, Defendants’ officers, Defendants’ directors, and their
immediate family members; Class Counsel; and the Judges who have presided over the Litigation
and their immediate family members. For purpose of the Settlement, “United States” means all fifty
States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam,
3
“But when notice is a person’s due, process which is a mere gesture is not due process. The
means employed must be such as one desirous of actually informing the absentee might reasonably
adopt to accomplish it. The reasonableness and hence the constitutional validity of any chosen
method may be defended on the ground that it is in itself reasonably certain to inform those affected
. . .” Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 315 (1950).
4
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 6 of 67
American Samoa, and the other territories and possessions of the United States.
14.
To guide the selection of measured media in reaching unknown Class Members, the
Notice Plan had a primary target audience of: all adults 18 years and older who have a cell phone.
We selected this broad target to ensure that the selected media reached all people who potentially
received an included text message. The combined measurable effort reached approximately 80% of
Settlement Class Members. In my experience, the reach of the Notice Plan is consistent with other
court-approved notice programs, and met due process requirements.
15.
Rule 23 directs that the best notice practicable under the circumstances must include
“individual notice to all members who can be identified through reasonable effort.”4 The notice
effort here satisfied this direction. If an email address was available from the Defendants’ records,
an Email Notice was sent. For all other cell phone numbers included in the Settlement Class, reverse
look-up procedures were performed to identify the best current physical mailing address associated
with each cell phone number. Then, for all Class Members for whom an associated physical mailing
address could be identified (and for any Class Members who were sent an Email Notice that was
ultimately undeliverable and a physical address could not be identified) notice was sent by first class
mail. Address updating (both prior to mailing and on undeliverable pieces) and re-mailing protocols
met or exceed those used in other class action settlements.
Individual Notice – Mailed Notice & Emailed Notice
16.
Following Preliminary Approval of the Settlement, the Defendants provided multiple
data files to ECA, which represented all known Settlement Class Members to date, some of which
4
FRCP 23(c)(2)(B).
5
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 7 of 67
included mailing and email addresses, while others had only an associated cell phone number
available. For all records with only an associated cell phone number, ECA used LexisNexis, a thirdparty service to perform a “reverse look-up” to determine the best associated physical address for
each record.
17.
Following the reverse look-up, and analysis of the data provided by Defendants to
avoid duplication, ECA mailed postcard notice to 1,469,301 individuals and transmitted email notice
to 1,529,646 individuals (a total of 2,998,947 records for the mailed and emailed notice efforts
combined).
18.
Beginning on January 15, 2016, Summary Email Notices were sent to all potential
Settlement Class Members for whom a facially valid email address was available. The Summary
Email Notice was created using an embedded html text format. This format provided text that is
easy to read without graphics, tables, images and other elements that would increase the likelihood
that the message could be blocked by Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and/or SPAM filters. The
emails were sent using a server known to the major emails providers as one not used to send bulk
“SPAM” or “junk” email blasts. Also, the emails were batched and sent in small groups so as to not
be erroneously flagged as a bulk junk email blast. Each Summary Email Notice was transmitted
with a unique message identifier.
19.
The Summary E-mail Notice included the website address of the case website. By
accessing the website, recipients are able to easily access the Detailed Notice in English or Spanish,
Settlement Agreement, Claim Form and other information about the Settlement. The Summary
Email Notice is included as Attachment 4.
6
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 8 of 67
20.
If the receiving e-mail server could not deliver the message, a “bounce code” was
returned along with the unique message identifier. For any Summary Email Notice for which a
bounce code was received indicating that the message was undeliverable, at least two additional
attempts were made to deliver the Notice by email. After completion of the Summary Email Notice
effort, ECA received back a total of 483,474 undeliverable emails.
21.
Prior to mailing the Double Postcard Notice, postal mailing addresses were checked
against the National Change of Address (“NCOA”) database5 maintained by the USPS, which
contains records of all reported permanent moves for the past four years. Any addresses returned by
the NCOA database as invalid were updated through a third-party address search service prior to
mailing. All addresses were certified via the Coding Accuracy Support System (“CASS”) to ensure
the quality of the zip codes, and verified through the Delivery Point Validation (“DPV”) to verify the
accuracy of the addresses. This address updating process is standard for the industry and for the
majority of promotional mailings that occur today.
22.
Beginning on January 15, 2016, 1,469,301 Double Postcard Notices were sent by
United States Postal Service (“USPS”) first class mail to potential Settlement Class Members to all
physical addresses identified using the reverse look-up process.
23.
A Double Postcard Notice allowed a simple, physical claim form to be sent directly to
the identified Settlement Class Members along with the notice text. The Double Postcard was
configured to allow the Claim Form to be torn off and returned to the administrator with the return
5
The NCOA database contains records of all permanent change of address submissions received by the USPS for the last
four years. The USPS makes this data available to mailing firms and lists submitted to it are automatically updated with
any reported move based on a comparison with the person’s name and known address.
7
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 9 of 67
address information already printed. Settlement Class Members were also informed that they can
easily file a claim online instead if they choose. ECA also sent the Summary Postcard Notice to
each of the 483,474 addresses that “bounced” back as undeliverable in the email notice effort.
24.
A copy of the Double Postcard Notice with Claim Form as printed and mailed is
included as Attachment 2.
25.
Additionally, a Detailed Notice and/or Claim Form were mailed to all persons who
request one via the toll-free phone number. As of March 15, 2016, 160 Notice Packets in English or
Spanish have been mailed as a result of such requests. A copy of the Detailed Notice in English and
the Detailed Notice in Spanish, as printed and mailed are included as Attachment 3.
26.
The return address on the Double Postcard Notices is a post office box maintained by
ECA. As of March 15, 2016, ECA has re-mailed 218 Double Postcard Notices for addresses that
were corrected through the USPS. For Double Postcard Notices that were returned as undeliverable,
ECA undertook additional public record research, using a third-party lookup service (“ALLFIND”,
maintained by LexisNexis), which as of March 15, 2016, has resulted in the re-mailing of 6,686
Double Postcard Notices. Address updating and re-mailing for undeliverable Double Postcard
Notices is ongoing and will continue through the Final Approval Hearing.
27.
As of March 15, 2016, ECA has emailed and mailed Notices to 2,998,947 unique
Settlement Class members, with notice to 64,393 unique, likely Settlement Class members currently
known to be undeliverable.
In my experience, this approximate 98% deliverable rate of the
individual notice effort met the expected range and is indicative of the extensive address updating
and re-mailing protocols used. The individual notice effort alone reached approximately 68% of the
8
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 10 of
67
proposed Settlement Class.
National Newspaper Inserts and Online Banner Notice
28.
The Notice Plan included a highly visible notice placement in the national newspaper
insert Parade magazine. On January 24, 2016, the Publication Notice appeared in Parade magazine
as a 3/10 page ad unit, which appeared in over 601 Sunday newspapers nationwide with distribution
in large cities and small towns. At the time of publication, Parade had an estimated circulation of 22
million. The Publication Notice as formatted for Parade is included as Attachment 5. A copy of the
tear sheet for the insertion in Parade magazine is included as Attachment 6.
29.
Internet Banner Notices measuring 300 x 250 pixels and 728 x 90 pixels were placed
on the online network Conversant Ad Network (a network delivery PC impressions to over 9,600
digital properties). The Banner Notice appeared across the country and in all U.S. Territories.
30.
Approximately 40.9 million adult impressions were generated by the Internet Banner
Notice, which ran from January 15, 2016 to January 28, 2016. Clicking on the Banner Notice linked
the reader to the case website where they could obtain information about the Settlement and link
directly to the online claim filing page to file a simple online claim. The online Banner Notice is
included as Attachment 7.
Sponsored Search Listings
31.
To facilitate locating the case website, sponsored search listings were acquired on the
three most highly-visited Internet search engines: Google, Yahoo! and Bing. When search engine
visitors search on common keyword combinations such as “Text Message Settlement,” the
sponsored search listing is generally displayed either at the top of the page prior to the search results
9
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 11 of
67
or in the upper right hand column.
32.
The Sponsored Search listings will continue to run through the claim filing deadline,
May 16, 2016. As of March 15, 2016, the sponsored listings have been displayed 58,201 times,
resulting in 4,880 clicks that displayed the case website. A complete list of the sponsored search
keyword combinations is included as Attachment 8. Examples of the sponsored search listing as
displayed on each search engine are included as Attachment 9.
Case Website
33.
On January 15, 2016, a neutral, informational, settlement website with an easy to
remember domain name (www.AFTCPASettlement.com) was established where potential
Settlement Class Members can obtain additional information and documents including the Detailed
Notice in English or Spanish, Settlement Agreement, Preliminary Approval Order and Claim Form.
The website also includes information on how potential Settlement Class Members can opt-out of
the Settlement if they choose. Class Members can file a claim via the website or download a paper
Claim Form and file by mail. The Claim Form available through the website is included here as
Attachment 10.
34.
The case website address was prominently displayed in all printed notice documents.
The Banner Notices linked directly to the case website.
35.
As of March 15, 2016, there have been 81,393 unique visitors to the case website and
over 284,821 website pages presented.
Toll-free Telephone Number and Postal Mailing Address
36.
On January 15, 2016, a toll-free number (1-877-866-0631) was established allowing
10
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 12 of
67
Class Members to call and request that a Detailed Notice in English or Spanish and/or a Claim Form
be mailed to them. The toll-free number also provides Class Members with access to information
about the Settlement in the form of recorded answers to frequently asked questions. This automated
phone system is available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. As of March 11, 2016, the toll-free
number has handled 6,258 calls representing 15,647 minutes of use.
37.
A postal mailing address and email address were established allowing Class Members
to request additional information or ask questions via these channels.
Exclusions and Objections
38.
The exclusion deadline passed on February 29, 2016. As of March 11, 2016, ECA
has received a total of 48 requests for exclusion from the Settlement Class. Of these, ten were
deemed complete and timely. The list of all ten complete and timely requests for exclusions
received is included as Attachment 11. The objection deadline also passed on February 29, 2016.
At the time of this declaration, I am aware of only two objections to the Settlement. I have reviewed
both objections and confirmed that there are no substantive objections relative to the method or form
of notice.
39.
I have been informed and believe that both objections were withdrawn after Plaintiffs
filed a Response in Opposition to the Objections and commenced discovery proceeding against the
objectors.
Claims To Date
40.
As of the week ending March 18, 2016, Class Members have submitted 101,962
Claim Forms to the Settlement Administrator. Class Members may submit Claim Forms up through
11
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 13 of
67
May 16, 2016. The Settlement Administrator continues to receive thousand of Claims each week.
For example, for the weeks ending March 4, 2016, 13,494 Claims were received, for week ending
March 11, 2016, 8,580 Claims and for the week ending March 18, 2016, 5,602 Claims. On average,
since the Notice Plan was commenced, the Settlement Administrator has received an average of
10,196 Claims per week, for each week up through the week ending March 18, 2016.
CAFA Notice
41.
On September 18, 2015, within the 10-day period required by the federal Class
Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), 28 U.S.C. § 1715, ECA sent a CAFA notice packet (or
“CAFA Notice”) to 57 federal and state officials. The CAFA Notice was mailed by USPS certified
mail to 56 officials, including the Attorneys General of each of the 50 states, the District of
Columbia and the U.S. Territory officials. The CAFA Notice was also sent by United Parcel Service
(“UPS”) to the Attorney General of the United States. On November 17, 2015, ECA sent a CAFA
Supplemental notice packet (or “CAFA Supplemental Notice”) to the same list 57 federal and state
officials. The Supplemental CAFA Notice was mailed by USPS certified mail to 56 officials,
including the Attorneys General of each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia and the U.S.
Territory officials. The Supplemental CAFA Notice was also sent by UPS to the Attorney General
of the United States. ECA received no response or requests for additional information from any of
the Attorneys General who were served the CAFA Notice and/or the CAFA Supplemental Notice.
PERFORMANCE OF THE NOTICE PROGRAM
Reach
42.
Using standard advertising media industry methodologies to calculate the overlap
12
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 14 of
67
inherent in exposures to the individual email, postal mail, print publication and digital efforts we
arrive at a combined, estimated measurable reach of approximately 80% of the Settlement Class.
Reach was enhanced further by the sponsored search listings and the case website.
43.
Many courts have accepted and understood that a 75 or 80 percent reach is more than
adequate. In 2010, the Federal Judicial Center issued a Judges’ Class Action Notice and Claims
Process Checklist and Plain Language Guide. This Guide states that, “the lynchpin in an objective
determination of the adequacy of a proposed notice effort is whether all the notice efforts together
will reach a high percentage of the class. It is reasonable to reach between 70–95%.6 Here we were
able to develop a notice plan that achieved this. These statistics reinforce the fact that the Notice
Plan was broad in scope and was designed to reach the greatest practicable number of Class
Members.
PLAIN LANGUAGE NOTICE DESIGN
44.
The Notices themselves were designed to be “noticed,” reviewed, and—by presenting
the information in plain language—understood by Class Members. The design of the Notices
followed the principles embodied in the Federal Judicial Center’s illustrative “model” notices posted
at www.fjc.gov. Many courts, and as previously cited, the FJC itself, have approved notices that we
have written and designed in a similar fashion. The Notices contained substantial, albeit easy-toread, summaries of all of the key information about Class Members’ rights and options. Consistent
with our normal practice, all notice documents underwent a final edit prior to actual mailing and
6
Federal Judicial Center, Judges’ Class Action Notice and Claims Process Checklist and Plain
Language Guide (2010), p. 3.
13
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 15 of
67
publication for grammatical errors and accuracy.
45.
All Notices were designed to increase noticeability and comprehension. Because
mailing recipients are accustomed to receiving junk mail and email that they may be inclined to
discard unread, the notice program calls for steps to bring the mailed and emailed Notice to the
attention of Settlement Class Members. Once people “notice” the Notices, it is critical that they can
understand them. As such, the Notices, as produced, were clearly worded with an emphasis on
simple, plain language to encourage readership and comprehension.
46. The Publication, Double Postcard and Summary Email Notices featured a prominent
headline (“If You Were Sent a Text Message from Hollister Co., Abercrombie & Fitch Co.,
Gilly Hicks, and/or abercrombie kids, You May Be Entitled to a Payment from a Class Action
Settlement.”) in bold text.
The headline alerted recipients and readers that the Notice is an
important document authorized by a court and that the content may affect them, thereby supplying
reasons to read the Notice.
47.
Class Notice also included a Detailed Notice. The Detailed Notice provided
substantial information to Settlement Class Members. The Detailed Notice began with a summary
page providing a concise overview of the important information and a table highlighting key options
available to Settlement Class Members. A table of contents, categorized into logical sections, helped
to organize the information, while a question and answer format made it easy to find answers to
common questions by breaking the information into simple headings.
48.
The Email Notice contained an embedded link to the case website where the Detailed
Notice and other settlement information can be accessed. The Email Notice was provided using an
14
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 16 of
67
embedded HTML text format. This format provided text that was easy to read without graphics,
tables, images and other elements that would increase the likelihood that the message was blocked
by Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and/or SPAM filters.
CONCLUSION
49.
In class action notice planning, execution, and analysis, we are guided by due process
considerations under the United States Constitution, by federal and local rules and statutes, and
further by case law pertaining to notice. This framework directs that the notice program be designed
to reach the greatest practicable number of potential Class Members and, in a settlement class action
notice situation such as this, that the notice or notice program itself not limit knowledge of the
availability of benefits—nor the ability to exercise other options—to Class Members in any way.
All of these requirements were met in this case.
50.
Our notice effort followed the guidance for how to satisfy due process obligations
that a notice expert gleans from the United States Supreme Court’s seminal decisions, which are: a)
to endeavor to actually inform the class, and b) to demonstrate that notice is reasonably calculated to
do so:
A.
“But when notice is a person’s due, process which is a mere gesture is not due
process. The means employed must be such as one desirous of actually
informing the absentee might reasonably adopt to accomplish it,” Mullane v.
Central Hanover Trust, 339 U.S. 306, 315 (1950).
B.
“[N]otice must be reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to
apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an
15
DECLARATION OF CAMERON R. AZARI, ESQ., ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT NOTICE PLAN
AND NOTICES
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 17 of
67
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 18 of
67
Attachment 1
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 19 of
67
SETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATOR’S PROTOCOL
1.
The Settlement Administrator1 shall keep a clear and careful record of all
communications with Settlement Class Members, all claims decisions, all expenses, and
all tasks performed in administering the claim process.
2.
The Settlement Administrator shall take all reasonable efforts to
administer the Claims efficiently and to avoid unnecessary fees and expenses. As soon as
work commences, the Settlement Administrator shall provide a detailed written
accounting of all fees and expenses on a regular basis to Class Counsel and Defense
Counsel, and shall respond promptly to inquiries by Class Counsel and Defense Counsel
concerning the administration and notice fees and expenses.
3.
The Parties are entitled to observe and monitor the performance of the
Settlement Administrator to assure compliance with the Settlement Agreement and this
Settlement Administrator’s Protocol (“Protocol”). The Settlement Administrator shall
promptly respond to all inquiries and requests for information made by Defense Counsel
or Class Counsel.
4.
Because the names of Settlement Class Members and other personal
information about them will be provided to the Settlement Administrator for purposes of
providing cash benefits and processing opt out requests, the Settlement Administrator
shall execute a confidentiality and non-disclosure agreement with Defendants, and shall
take all reasonable steps to ensure that any information provided to it by the Settlement
1
Unless otherwise defined, all capitalized terms herein shall have the same force,
meaning and effect as ascribed in Section II (entitled “Definitions”) of the Settlement
Agreement filed by the Parties on September 10, 2015 (as ECF Docket 126-1) in
Anamaria Chimeno-Buzzi, et al. v. Hollister Co., et al., Case No. 14-cv-23120-MGC
(S.D. Fla.) (“Settlement Agreement”), including all exhibits and addenda thereto.
1
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 20 of
67
Class Members will be used solely for the purpose of effecting the Settlement.
5.
In fulfilling its responsibilities in providing Class Notice, the Settlement
Administrator shall be responsible for, without limitation, consulting on and designing
the notice to the Class via various forms of media, including implementing the notice
program set forth in the Administrator Declaration. In particular, the Settlement
Administrator shall be responsible for: (a) arranging for the dissemination of the
Summary Notice, the Long Form Notice, and / or the Class Notice, as set forth in the
Administrator Declaration and pursuant to the requirements of the Settlement Agreement
and this Protocol; (b) designing and implementing the Class Notice as set forth in the
Administrator Declaration and pursuant to the requirements of the Settlement Agreement
and this Protocol; (c) responding to requests from Class Counsel and/or Defense Counsel;
and (d) otherwise implementing and/or assisting with the dissemination of the Class
Notice Administrator Declaration and pursuant to the requirements of the Settlement
Agreement and this Protocol.
6.
The Settlement Administrator shall administer the Settlement in
accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement and this Protocol and, without
limiting the foregoing, shall:
a.
Treat any and all documents, communications and other
information and materials received in connection with the administration of the
Settlement as confidential and shall not disclose any or all such documents,
communications or other information to any person or entity except as provided for in the
Settlement Agreement or by court order;
b.
Receive opt out and other requests and correspondence from
2
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 21 of
67
Settlement Class Members to exclude themselves from the Settlement and provide to
Class Counsel and Defense Counsel a copy thereof within three (3) days of receipt. If the
Settlement Administrator receives any exclusion forms or other requests from Settlement
Class Members to exclude themselves from the Settlement after the deadline for the
submission of such forms and requests, the Settlement Administrator shall promptly
provide Class Counsel and Defense Counsel with copies thereof; and
c.
Receive and maintain all correspondence from any Class Member
regarding the Settlement.
7.
Each Class Member shall submit a Claim Form pursuant to the
instructions set forth in the Claim Form.
8.
The Claim Form shall be available as part of the Class Notice, on the
Internet website at www.AFTCPAsettlement.com, in response to requests through the
toll-free voice response unit with message and interactive voice response (IVR), and also
through contacting by telephone or by mail or other similar service the Settlement
Administrator and requesting a copy of the Claim Form be sent to them. The Claim
Form on the Internet website and the hard copy Claim Form shall be consistent in all
substantive respects.
9.
If the Class Member does not timely comply and/or is unable to produce
documents to substantiate and/or verify the information requested and the claim is
otherwise not approved, the claim may be reduced or denied.
10.
Any Settlement Class Member who, in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the Settlement Agreement or this Protocol, neither seeks exclusion from the
Class nor files a Claim Form, will not be entitled to receive any cash payment or any
3
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 22 of
67
other relief pursuant to the Settlement, but will be bound together with all Settlement
Class Members by all of the terms of the Settlement Agreement and this Protocol,
including the terms of the Final Order and Judgment to be entered in the Action and the
releases provided for herein, and will be barred from bringing any action in any forum
(state or federal) against any of the Released Parties concerning the Released Claims.
11.
The Settlement Administrator shall begin the claim process so that it is
completed within the time period specified in the Settlement Agreement, the Preliminary
Approval Order, and / or this Protocol.
12.
The Settlement Administrator shall exercise, in its discretion, all usual and
customary steps to prevent fraud and abuse and take any reasonable steps to prevent fraud
and abuse in the claim process.
13.
Claim Forms submitted by Settlement Class Members that are not
substantially in compliance with the instructions on the Claim Form, the Settlement
Agreement, and this Protocol shall be rejected. Where a good faith basis exists, the
Settlement Administrator may reject a Settlement Class Member’s Claim Form for,
among other reasons, the following:
a.
The Settlement Class Member failed to provide adequate support
of their claim pursuant to a request of the Settlement Administrator
b.
Failure to fully complete and/or sign the Claim Form;
c.
Illegible Claim Form;
d.
Failure to provide adequate proof of that Person submitting the
Claim form is a Settlement Class Member if the same is required or requested by the
Settlement Administrator;
4
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 23 of
67
e.
The Claim Form is fraudulent;
f.
The Claim Form is duplicative of another Claim Form;
g.
The Person submitting the Claim Form is not a Class Member;
h.
The Person submitting the Claim Form requests that payment be
made to a person or entity other than the Class Member for whom the Claim Form is
submitted; and/or
i.
14.
Failure to submit a Claim Form by the Claim Deadline.
The Settlement Administrator shall determine whether a Claim Form
meets the requirements set forth in this Protocol and or the Settlement Agreement. Each
Claim Form shall be submitted to and reviewed by the Settlement Administrator, who
shall determine (in accordance with this Protocol and the Settlement Agreement) the
extent, if any, to which each claim shall be allowed. The Settlement Administrator shall
use all reasonable efforts and means to identify and reject duplicate and/or fraudulent
claims, including, without limitation, indexing all cash payments provided to Settlement
Class Members.
15.
The Claim Form will be deemed to have been submitted when posted, if
received with a postmark or equivalent mark by a courier company indicated on the
envelope or mailer with the instructions set out in the Claim Form. In all other cases, the
Claim Form shall be deemed to have been submitted when it is actually received by the
Settlement Administrator. To be valid, all Claim Forms must be submitted prior to or on
the Claim Deadline.
16.
Claims that have been properly submitted shall be designated as
“Approved Claims.” The Settlement Administrator shall examine the Claim Form before
5
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 24 of
67
designating the claim as an Approved Claim, to determine that the information on the
Claim Form is reasonably complete and contains sufficient information to enable the
mailing of the settlement payment to the Settlement Class Member.
17.
No Settlement Class Member may submit more than one Claim Form.
The Settlement Administrator shall identify any Claim Forms that appear to seek relief on
behalf of the same Class Member (“Duplicative Claim Forms”). The Settlement
Administrator shall determine whether there is any duplication of claims, if necessary by
contacting the Settlement Class Member(s) or their counsel. The Settlement
Administrator shall designate any such Duplicative Claims as rejected claims to the
extent they allege the same damages or allege damages on behalf of the same Class
Member.
18.
The Settlement Administrator shall have thirty (30) days after the date of
the Claim Deadline to exercise the right of rejection. The Settlement Administrator shall
notify the Class Member using the contact information provided in the Claim Form of the
rejection. Upon request, Class Counsel and Defense Counsel shall be provided with
copies of all such notifications to Settlement Class Members. If any claimant whose
Claim Form has been rejected, in whole or in part, desires to contest such rejection, the
claimant must, within ten (10) business days from receipt of the rejection, transmit to the
Settlement Administrator by e-mail or U.S. mail a notice and statement of reasons
indicating the claimant’s grounds for contesting the rejection, along with any supporting
documentation, and requesting further review by the Settlement Administrator, in
consultation with Class Counsel and Defense Counsel, of the denial of the claim. If Class
Counsel and Defense Counsel cannot agree on a resolution of the claimant’s notice
6
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 25 of
67
contesting the rejection, the disputed claim shall be presented to the Court or a referee
appointed by the Court for summary and non-appealable resolution.
19.
No person shall have any claim against Defendants, Defense Counsel,
Plaintiffs, the Settlement Class, Class Counsel, and / or the Settlement Administrator
based on any eligibility determinations, distributions, or awards made in accordance with
the Settlement Agreement. This provision does not affect or limit in any way the right of
review by the Court or referee of any disputed Claim Forms as provided in this Protocol.
20.
Class Counsel and Defense Counsel shall have the right to inspect the
Claim Forms and supporting documentation received by the Settlement Administrator at
any time upon reasonable notice.
21.
Not later than seven (7) calendar days before the date of the Fairness
Hearing, the Settlement Administrator shall file with the Court: (a) a list of those persons
who have opted out or excluded themselves from the Settlement; and (b) the details
regarding the number of valid Claim Forms received and processed by the Settlement
Administrator.
22.
The Settlement Administrator may retain one or more persons to assist in
the completion of its responsibilities.
23.
In the event the Settlement Administrator fails to perform its duties, and/or
makes a material or fraudulent misrepresentation to, or conceals requested material
information from, Plaintiffs, Class Counsel, Defendants, and/or Defense Counsel, then
the party to whom the misrepresentation is made shall, in addition to any other
appropriate relief, have the right to demand that the Settlement Administrator
immediately be replaced. No party shall unreasonably withhold consent to remove the
7
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 26 of
67
Settlement Administrator. The Parties will attempt to resolve any disputes regarding the
retention or dismissal of the Settlement Administrator in good faith, and, if they are
unable to do so, will refer the matter to the Court for resolution.
8
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 27 of
67
Attachment 2
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 28 of
67
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 29 of
67
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 30 of
67
Attachment 3
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 31 of
67
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
If You Were Sent a Text Message from Hollister Co.,
Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Gilly Hicks, and / or
abercrombie kids, You May Be Entitled to a
Payment from a Class Action Settlement.
A federal court directed this notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer.

A $10 million Settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit about whether J.M. Hollister,
LLC d/b/a Hollister Co. and/or Abercrombie & Fitch Co. (the “Defendants”) sent text messages
to wireless telephone numbers without prior express written consent of the recipients in violation
of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (“TCPA”). The Defendants deny
the allegations in the lawsuit, and the Court has not decided who is right.

The Settlement offers payments to Settlement Class Members who file valid claims.
Additionally, the Defendants have agreed to provide training concerning TCPA compliance to
key managers responsible for text communications to customers.

Your legal rights are affected whether you act or do not act. Read this notice carefully.
YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND OPTIONS IN THIS SETTLEMENT
SUBMIT A CLAIM FORM
Submit a Claim Form seeking cash payment.
EXCLUDE YOURSELF
Request to be excluded and get no benefits from the Settlement. This
is the only option that allows you to start or continue your own
lawsuit against the Defendants for the claims at issue in the
Settlement.
OBJECT
Write to the Court about why you do not like the Settlement.
GO TO A HEARING
Ask to speak in Court about the fairness of the Settlement.
DO NOTHING
Get no benefits. Give up any rights you might have to sue the
Defendants about the claims resolved by the Settlement.

These rights and options—and the deadlines to exercise them—are explained in this notice.

The Court in charge of this case still has to decide whether to approve the Settlement. If it does,
and after any appeals are resolved, benefits will be distributed to those who submit qualifying
claim forms. Please be patient.
QUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-866-0631 OR VISIT www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
Si desea recibir esta notificación en español, llámenos o visite nuestra página web.
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 32 of
67
WHAT THIS NOTICE CONTAINS
BASIC INFORMATION ..................................................................................................................... PAGE 3
1. Why is there a notice?
2. What is this litigation about?
3. What is the Telephone Consumer Protection Act?
4. Why is this a class action?
5. Why is there a Settlement?
WHO IS PART OF THE SETTLEMENT .............................................................................................. PAGE 4
6. Who is included in the Settlement?
7. What if I am not sure whether I am included in the Settlement?
THE SETTLEMENT BENEFITS ......................................................................................................... PAGE 4
8. What does the Settlement provide?
9. How do I file a claim?
10. When will I receive my payment?
EXCLUDING YOURSELF FROM THE SETTLEMENT ....................................................................... PAGE 5
11. How do I get out of the Settlement?
12. If I do not exclude myself, can I sue the Defendants for the same thing later?
13. What am I giving up to stay in the Settlement Class?
14. If I exclude myself, can I still get a payment?
THE LAWYERS REPRESENTING YOU ............................................................................................. PAGE 6
15. Do I have a lawyer in the case?
16. How will the lawyers be paid?
OBJECTING TO THE SETTLEMENT.................................................................................................. PAGE 7
17. How do I tell the Court if I do not like the Settlement?
18. What is the difference between objecting and asking to be excluded?
THE COURT’S FAIRNESS HEARING ............................................................................................... PAGE 8
19. When and where will the Court decide whether to approve the Settlement?
20. Do I have to attend the hearing?
21. May I speak at the hearing?
IF YOU DO NOTHING ....................................................................................................................... PAGE 8
22. What happens if I do nothing at all?
GETTING MORE INFORMATION ..................................................................................................... PAGE 9
23. How do I get more information?
QUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-866-0631 OR VISIT www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
2
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 33 of
67
BASIC INFORMATION
1. Why is there a notice?
A Court authorized this notice because you have a right to know about the proposed Settlement of a
class action lawsuit known as Anamaria Chimeno-Buzzi & Lakedrick Reed v. Hollister Co. &
Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Case No. 14-cv-23120-MGC and about all of your options before the
Court decides whether to give final approval to the Settlement. This notice explains the lawsuit, the
Settlement, and your legal rights.
Judge Marcia G. Cooke of the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida is overseeing
this case. The people who sued are called the “Plaintiffs.” Hollister Co. and Abercrombie & Fitch
Co. are the “Defendants.”
2. What is this litigation about?
The lawsuit alleges that Hollister Co. and/or Abercrombie & Fitch Co. sent text messages to
Plaintiffs’ wireless telephone numbers without prior express written consent and in violation of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (“TCPA”), and it seeks actual and statutory
damages under the TCPA on behalf of the named Plaintiffs and a proposed class of all individuals in
the United States who received one or more unsolicited text messages from or on behalf of Hollister
Co. and/or Abercrombie & Fitch Co.
Defendants deny each and every allegation of wrongdoing, liability, and damages that was or could
have been asserted in the litigation and further deny that the claims in the litigation would be
appropriate for class treatment if the litigation were to proceed through litigation and trial.
The Plaintiffs’ Complaint, Settlement Agreement, and other case-related documents are posted on the
website, www.AFTCPAsettlement.com. The Settlement resolves the lawsuit. The Court has not
decided who is right.
3. What is the Telephone Consumer Protection Act?
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (commonly referred to as the “TCPA”) is a federal law that
restricts telephone solicitations and the use of automated telephone equipment. The Plaintiffs here
alleged that Defendants sent text messages to Settlement Class Members without their prior written
consent in violation of the TCPA.
4. Why is this a class action?
In a class action, one or more people called “Class Representatives” (in this case, Plaintiffs Anamaria
Chimeno-Buzzi and Lakedrick Reed) sue on behalf of themselves and other people with similar
claims. Together, all the people with similar claims (except those who exclude themselves) are
members of a “Settlement Class.”
QUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-866-0631 OR VISIT www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
3
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 34 of
67
5. Why is there a Settlement?
The Court has not decided in favor of the Plaintiffs or Defendants. Instead, both sides have agreed to
the Settlement. By agreeing to the Settlement, the Parties avoid the costs and uncertainty of a trial,
and if the Settlement is approved by the Court, Settlement Class Members will receive the benefits
described in this notice. The proposed Settlement does not mean that any law was broken or that the
Defendants did anything wrong. The Defendants deny all legal claims in this case. Plaintiffs and
their lawyers think the proposed Settlement is best for everyone who is affected.
WHO IS PART OF THE SETTLEMENT
6. Who is included in the Settlement?
The Settlement includes all persons in the United States who received one or more text messages sent
by or on behalf of Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., Hollister Co., Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Gilly
Hicks, and/or abercrombie kids, between August 25, 2010 and December 18, 2015. These people are
called the “Settlement Class” or “Settlement Class Members.”
Excluded from the Settlement Class are (a) Defendants, Defendants’ officers, Defendants’ directors,
and their immediate family members; (b) Class Counsel; and (c) the Judges who have presided over
the Litigation and their immediate family members.
7. What if I am not sure whether I am included in the Settlement?
If you are not sure whether you are in the Settlement Class or have any other questions about the
Settlement, visit the settlement website at www.AFTCPAsettlement.com or call the toll-free number,
1-877-866-0631. You also may send questions to the Settlement Administrator at Chimeno-Buzzi
Text Settlement Administrator, PO Box 3656, Portland, OR 97208-3656.
THE SETTLEMENT BENEFITS
8. What does the Settlement provide?
The Defendants have agreed to pay $10 million to create a “Settlement Fund.” The Settlement Fund
will be used to pay all Settlement costs, including Notice and Administration costs, the Attorneys’
Fee Award, and Service Awards to the Class Representatives. The remaining “Net Settlement Fund”
will be distributed as cash payments to Settlement Class Members who submit valid claims. The
cash payments will be distributed on a pro rata basis to valid claimants depending on the number of
valid claims filed. Each Settlement Class Member may only file one valid claim and receive only
one cash payment.
Additionally, within one year of the Effective Date of the Settlement, Defendants agree that they will
provide training concerning TCPA compliance to key managers responsible for text communications
to customers.
QUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-866-0631 OR VISIT www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
4
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 35 of
67
9. How do I file a claim?
If you qualify for a cash payment you must complete and submit a valid Claim Form. You can file
your Claim Form online at www.AFTCPAsettlement.com or download a Claim Form from the
website and file it by email to [email protected] The deadline to file a claim online
or via email is 11:59 p.m. PST on May 16, 2016.
You may also file your Claim Form via regular mail. Claim Forms submitted by mail must be
postmarked on or before May 16, 2016 to:
Chimeno-Buzzi Text Settlement Administrator
PO Box 3656
Portland, OR 97208-3656
No matter which method you choose to file your Claim Form, please read the Claim Form carefully
and provide all the information required. Only one Claim Form per Settlement Class Member may be
submitted.
10. When will I receive my payment?
Payments to valid Class Members will be made only after the Court grants “final approval” to the
Settlement and after any appeals are resolved (see “The Court’s Fairness Hearing” below). If there
are appeals, resolving them can take time. Please be patient.
EXCLUDING YOURSELF FROM THE SETTLEMENT
If you do not want benefits from the Settlement, and you want to keep any right you might have to
sue the Defendants about the issues in this case, then you must take steps to get out of the Settlement.
This is called excluding yourself or “opting out” of the Settlement Class.
11. How do I get out of the Settlement?
To exclude yourself from the Settlement, you must send a letter or other written document by mail to:
Chimeno-Buzzi Text Settlement Administrator
PO Box 3656
Portland, OR 97208-3656
Your request to be excluded from the Settlement must be personally signed by you and contain a
statement that indicates your desire to be “excluded from the Settlement Class” and that you are
“otherwise a member of the Settlement Class.”
Your exclusion request must be postmarked no later than February 29, 2016. You cannot ask to be
excluded on the phone, by email, or at the website.
You may opt out of the Settlement Class only for yourself. So-called “mass” or “class” opt outs,
whether filed by third parties on behalf of a “mass” or “class” of Class Members or multiple Class
Members where no personal statement has been signed by each and every individual Class Member,
are not allowed.
QUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-866-0631 OR VISIT www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
5
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 36 of
67
12. If I do not exclude myself, can I sue the Defendants for the same thing later?
No. Unless you exclude yourself, you give up any right you might have to sue the Defendants for
legal claims that the Settlement resolves. You must exclude yourself from the Settlement Class in
order to try to maintain your own lawsuit. If you start your own lawsuit, you will have to hire your
own lawyer, and you will have to prove your claims.
13. What am I giving up to stay in the Settlement Class?
Unless you exclude yourself from the Settlement, you cannot sue or be part of any other lawsuit
against the Defendants about the issues in this case, including any existing litigation, arbitration, or
proceeding. Unless you exclude yourself, all of the decisions and judgments by the Court will bind
you. If you file a Claim Form for benefits or do nothing at all, you will be releasing Defendants from
all of the claims described and identified in Section IX of the Settlement Agreement.
The Settlement Agreement is available at www.AFTCPAsettlement.com. The Settlement Agreement
provides more detail regarding the release and describes the released claims with specific
descriptions in necessary, accurate legal terminology, so read it carefully. You can talk to the law
firms representing the Class listed in Question 15 for free, or you can, at your own expense, talk to
your own lawyer if you have any questions about the released claims or what they mean.
14. If I exclude myself, can I still get a payment?
No. You will not get a payment from the Settlement Fund if you exclude yourself from the
Settlement.
THE LAWYERS REPRESENTING YOU
15. Do I have a lawyer in the case?
The Court has appointed the following lawyers as “Class Counsel” to represent all members of the
Settlement Class.
Robert R. Ahdoot
AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
1016 Palm Avenue
West Hollywood, CA 90069
Frank S. Hedin
CAREY RODRIGUEZ MILIAN
GONYA, LLP
1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 700
Miami, FL 33131
Joseph J. Siprut
SIPRUT PC
17 North State Street, Suite 1600
Chicago, IL 60602
You will not be charged for these lawyers. If you want to be represented by another lawyer, you may
hire one to appear in Court for you at your own expense.
16. How will the lawyers be paid?
Class Counsel intend to request up to thirty-five percent (35%) of the value of the Settlement for
attorneys’ fees, plus reimbursement of reasonable, actual out-of-pocket expenses incurred in the
QUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-866-0631 OR VISIT www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
6
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 37 of
67
litigation. The fees and expenses awarded by the Court will be paid out of the Settlement Fund. The
Court will decide the amount of fees and expenses to award.
Class Counsel also will request that Service Awards of up to $5,000 each be paid from the Settlement
Fund to the Class Representatives for their service as representatives on behalf of the whole
Settlement Class.
OBJECTING TO THE SETTLEMENT
17. How do I tell the Court if I do not like the Settlement?
If you are a Settlement Class Member (and do not exclude yourself from the Settlement Class), you
can object to any part of the Settlement. To object, you must submit a letter or other written
document that includes the following:
1) A heading that includes the case name and case number, Anamaria Chimeno-Buzzi &
Lakedrick Reed v. Hollister Co. & Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Case No. 14-cv-23120-MGC;
2) Your name, address, telephone number, and if represented by counsel, the name, bar number,
address, and telephone number of your counsel;
3) A signed declaration stating, under penalty of perjury, that you are a member of the
Settlement Class;
4) A statement of all your objections to the Settlement, including your legal and factual basis for
each objection; and
5) A statement of whether you intend to appear at the Fairness Hearing, either with or without
counsel, and if with counsel, the name, bar number, address, and telephone number of your
counsel who will attend.
You must file your objection with the Court (using the Court’s electronic filing system or in any
manner in which the Court accepts filings) and mail your objection to each of the following six (6)
addresses, and your objection must be postmarked by February 29, 2016:
CLERK OF THE COURT
ADMINISTRATOR
DEFENDANTS’ COUNSEL
Clerk of the Court
Wilkie D. Ferguson, Jr. United
States District Courthouse
400 North Miami Avenue
Miami, FL 33128
Chimeno-Buzzi Text
Settlement Administrator
P.O. Box 3656
Portland, OR 97208-3656
Meredith Slawe
DRINKER, BIDDLE & REATH, LLP
ONE Logan Square, Suite 2000
Philadelphia, PA 19103
CLASS COUNSEL
Robert R. Ahdoot
AHDOOT & WOLFSON,
PC1016 Palm Avenue
West Hollywood, CA 90069
Frank S. Hedin
CAREY RODRIGUEZ MILIAN
GONYA, LLP
1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 700
Miami, FL 33131
Joseph J. Siprut
SIPRUT PC
17 North State Street, Suite 1600
Chicago, IL 60620
QUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-866-0631 OR VISIT www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
7
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 38 of
67
18. What is the difference between objecting and asking to be excluded?
Objecting is simply telling the Court that you do not like something about the Settlement. You can
object to the Settlement only if you do not exclude yourself. Excluding yourself is telling the Court
that you do not want to be part of the Settlement. If you exclude yourself, you have no basis to object
to the Settlement because it no longer affects you.
THE COURT’S FAIRNESS HEARING
The Court will hold a hearing to decide whether to approve the Settlement and any requests for fees
and expenses (“Fairness Hearing”).
19. When and where will the Court decide whether to approve the Settlement?
The Court has scheduled a Fairness Hearing on March 30, 2016 at 11:30 a.m., at the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Wilkie D. Ferguson, Jr. United States Courthouse,
Room 11-2, 400 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida 33128. The hearing may be moved to a
different date or time without additional notice, so it is a good idea to check
www.AFTCPAsettlement.com for updates. At this hearing, the Court will consider whether the
Settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court will also consider the requests by Class
Counsel for attorneys’ fees and expenses and for Service Awards to the Class Representatives. If
there are objections, the Court will consider them at that time. After the hearing, the Court will
decide whether to approve the Settlement. It is unknown how long these decisions will take.
20. Do I have to attend the hearing?
No. Class Counsel will answer any questions the Court may have. But, you are welcome to attend
the hearing at your own expense. If you send an objection, you do not have to come to Court to talk
about it. As long as you submitted your written objection on time, to the proper addresses, and it
complies with the other requirements set forth above, the Court will consider it. You also may pay
your own lawyer to attend the hearing, but it is not necessary.
21. May I speak at the hearing?
You may ask the Court for permission to speak at the Fairness Hearing. To do so, your filed
objection must include a statement of whether you intend to appear at the Fairness Hearing (See
Question 17 above).
You cannot speak at the hearing if you exclude yourself from the Settlement.
IF YOU DO NOTHING
22. What happens if I do nothing at all?
If you are a Class Member and do nothing, you will not get benefits from the Settlement. And, unless
you exclude yourself, you will be bound by the judgment entered by the Court. This means you will
QUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-866-0631 OR VISIT www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
8
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 39 of
67
not be able to start a lawsuit, continue with a lawsuit, or be part of any other lawsuit or proceeding
against the Defendants about the statements and claims at issue in this case.
GETTING MORE INFORMATION
23. How do I get more information?
This notice summarizes the proposed Settlement. More details are in the Settlement Agreement. For
a complete, definitive statement of the Settlement terms, refer to the Settlement Agreement at
www.AFTCPAsettlement.com. You may also write with questions to the Settlement Administrator
at Chimeno-Buzzi Text Settlement Administrator, PO Box 3656, Portland, OR 97208-3656, or call
the toll-free number, 1-877-866-0631.
QUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-866-0631 OR VISIT www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
9
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 40 of
67
TRIBUNAL DEL DISTRITO DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS PARA EL DISTRITO SUR DE FLORIDA
Si le enviaron un mensaje de texto de Hollister Co.,
Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Gilly Hicks, y/o
abercrombie kids, podrá tener derecho a recibir
un pago del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva.
Un tribunal federal ordenó este aviso. Esta no es una solicitud de un abogado.

Se ha logrado un Acuerdo por USD 10 millones en una acción judicial por una demanda colectiva sobre si J.M.
Hollister, LLC, conocido comercialmente como Hollister Co. y/o Abercrombie & Fitch Co. (los “Demandados”)
enviaron mensajes de texto a números de teléfonos inalámbricos sin el previo consentimiento escrito de los
destinatarios, en violación de la Ley de Protección al Consumidor Telefónico (Telephone Consumer Protection
Act, “TCPA”), Código de los EE. UU. [U.S.C.], Título 47, sección 227. Los Demandados niegan las acusaciones
en el juicio y el Tribunal no ha resuelto quién tiene razón.

El Acuerdo ofrece pagos a los Miembros del grupo del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva que presentan
reclamaciones válidas. Además, los Demandados han aceptado brindar capacitación sobre el cumplimiento de la
TCPA a los gerentes clave que son responsables de las comunicaciones por mensajes de texto a los clientes.

Independientemente de que actúe o no, sus derechos legales se verán afectados. Lea esta notificación
detenidamente.
SUS DERECHOS LEGALES Y OPCIONES EN ESTE ACUERDO
PRESENTAR UN
Presentar un Formulario de reclamo para obtener un pago en efectivo.
FORMULARIO DE RECLAMO
EXCLUIRSE
Solicitar ser excluido y no obtener ningún beneficio del Acuerdo. Esta es la única
opción que le permite iniciar o continuar su propio juicio contra los Demandados
por las reclamaciones en cuestión en el Acuerdo.
OBJETAR
Escriba al Tribunal por qué no le agrada el Acuerdo.
ASISTIR A UNA AUDIENCIA
Solicitar hablar en el Tribunal sobre la imparcialidad del Acuerdo.
NO HACER NADA
No recibe beneficios. Renuncia a los derechos que pudiera tener para iniciar
acciones legales contra los Demandados sobre las reclamaciones resueltas por el
Acuerdo.

Estos derechos y opciones, y las fechas límite para ejercerlos, se explican en esta notificación.

El Tribunal a cargo de este caso no ha aprobado todavía el Acuerdo. Si lo hace, y después de resolver cualquier
apelación, se distribuirán los beneficios entre quienes presenten los formularios de reclamación que cumplan con
los requisitos. Tenga paciencia.
¿TIENE ALGUNA PREGUNTA? LLAME AL 1-877-866-0631 O VISITE www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
Si desea recibir esta notificación en español, llámenos o visite nuestra página web.
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 41 of
67
QUÉ CONTIENE ESTE AVISO
INFORMACIÓN BÁSICA ...................................................................................................... PÁGINA 3
1. ¿Por qué existe un aviso?
2. ¿De qué se trata este litigio?
3. ¿Qué es la Ley de Protección al Consumidor Telefónico?
4. ¿Por qué es esta una demanda colectiva?
5. ¿Por qué existe un Acuerdo?
¿QUIÉN ES PARTE DEL ACUERDO? ................................................................................... PÁGINA 4
6. ¿Quiénes están incluidos en el Acuerdo?
7. ¿Qué ocurre si no estoy seguro de ser parte del Acuerdo de conciliación?
LOS BENEFICIOS DEL ACUERDO ....................................................................................... PÁGINA 4
8. ¿Qué estipula el Acuerdo?
9. ¿Cómo presento una reclamación?
10. ¿Cuándo recibiré mi pago?
CÓMO EXCLUIRSE DE LA CONCILIACIÓN ......................................................................... PÁGINA 5
11. ¿Cómo me excluyo de la Conciliación?
12. Si no me excluyo, ¿puedo iniciar acciones legales contra los Demandados por lo mismo
más adelante?
13. ¿A qué renuncio para mantenerme en el Grupo de Conciliación?
14. Si me excluyo, ¿igual podré recibir un pago?
LOS ABOGADOS QUE LO REPRESENTAN ......................................................................... PÁGINA 6
15. ¿Tengo un abogado en esta causa?
16. ¿Cómo se les pagará a los abogados?
OBJECIONES AL ACUERDO................................................................................................. PÁGINA 7
17. ¿Cómo le hago saber al Tribunal que no me agrada el Acuerdo?
18. ¿Cuál es la diferencia entre objetar y excluirse?
LA AUDIENCIA DE IMPARCIALIDAD DEL TRIBUNAL ........................................................ PÁGINA 8
19. ¿Cuándo y dónde decidirá el Tribunal si aprueba el Acuerdo de conciliación?
20. ¿Debo asistir a la audiencia?
21. ¿Puedo intervenir en la audiencia?
SI DECIDE NO HACER NADA .............................................................................................. PÁGINA 8
22. ¿Qué sucede si no hago nada?
CÓMO OBTENER MÁS INFORMACIÓN .............................................................................. PÁGINA 8
23. ¿Cómo obtengo más información?
¿TIENE ALGUNA PREGUNTA? LLAME AL 1-877-866-0631 O VISITE www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
2
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 42 of
67
INFORMACIÓN BÁSICA
1. ¿Por qué existe un aviso?
Un Tribunal autorizó este aviso porque usted tiene derecho a conocer el Acuerdo propuesto de una acción legal por
una demanda colectiva conocida como Anamaria Chimeno-Buzzi & Lakedrick Reed v. Hollister Co. & Abercrombie &
Fitch Co., Caso n.º 14-cv-23120-MGC y con respecto a todas sus opciones, antes de que el Tribunal resuelva si
otorgará una aprobación definitiva al Acuerdo. Este aviso explica la demanda, el Acuerdo y sus derechos legales.
La Jueza Marcia G. Cooke del Tribunal de Distrito de los Estados Unidos para el Distrito Sur de Florida está a cargo
de este caso. A las personas que iniciaron el juicio se las denomina “Demandantes”. Hollister Co. y Abercrombie &
Fitch Co. son los “Demandados”.
2. ¿De qué se trata este litigio?
El juicio alega que Hollister Co. y/o Abercrombie & Fitch Co. envió mensajes a los números de teléfonos inalámbricos
de los Demandantes sin el previo consentimiento escrito y en violación de la Ley de Protección al Consumidor
Telefónico (Telephone Consumer Protection Act, “TCPA”), Código de los EE. UU. [U.S.C.], Título 47, sección 227, y
procura obtener un resarcimiento por daños y perjuicios reales y legales en virtud de la TCPA en nombre de los
Demandantes mencionados y una demanda colectiva propuesta de todas las personas en los Estados Unidos que
recibieron uno o más mensajes de texto no solicitados de Hollister Co. y/o Abercrombie & Fitch Co., o en su nombre.
Los Demandados niegan cada una y todas las acusaciones de delito, responsabilidad y daños y perjuicios que fueron o
pudieron ser entabladas en el litigio; asimismo, niegan que las reclamaciones en el litigio sean apropiadas para darles
tratamiento de demanda colectiva si es que el litigio fuera a proceder mediante litigio y juicio.
La reclamación de los Demandantes, el Acuerdo de conciliación y otros documentos relacionados con el caso están
publicados en la página web www.AFTCPAsettlement.com. El Acuerdo resuelve el juicio. El Tribunal no ha decidido
quién tiene la razón.
3. ¿Qué es la Ley de Protección al Consumidor Telefónico?
La Ley de Protección al Consumidor Telefónico (denominada comúnmente como “TCPA” por sus siglas en inglés) es
una ley federal que restringe las solicitudes telefónicas y el uso de equipos telefónicos automatizados. Los
Demandantes aquí alegan que los Demandados enviaron mensajes de texto a los Miembros del grupo del Acuerdo de
la demanda colectiva, sin su previo consentimiento escrito en violación de la TCPA.
4. ¿Por qué es esta una demanda colectiva?
En una demanda colectiva, una o más personas denominadas “Representantes del grupo de la demanda colectiva” (en
este caso, los Demandantes Anamaria Chimeno-Buzzi y Lakedrick Reed) inician una acción judicial en su propio
nombre y en nombre de otras personas con reclamaciones similares. Juntas, todas las personas con reclamaciones
similares (excepto quienes se excluyan) son miembros del “Grupo del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva”.
5. ¿Por qué existe un Acuerdo?
El Tribunal no ha fallado a favor de los Demandantes ni de los Demandados. En su lugar, ambas partes aceptaron
llegar a un Acuerdo. Al aceptar este Acuerdo, las partes evitan los costos y la incertidumbre de un juicio y, si el
Tribunal aprueba el Acuerdo, los miembros del Grupo del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva recibirán los beneficios
descritos en este aviso. El Acuerdo propuesto no implica que se haya violado alguna ley ni que los Demandados hayan
¿TIENE ALGUNA PREGUNTA? LLAME AL 1-877-866-0631 O VISITE www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
3
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 43 of
67
hecho algo incorrecto. Los Demandados niegan todos los reclamos legales en este caso. Los Demandantes y sus
abogados consideran que el Acuerdo propuesto es lo mejor para todas las personas afectadas.
¿QUIÉN ES PARTE DEL ACUERDO?
6. ¿Quiénes están incluidos en el Acuerdo?
El Acuerdo incluye a todas las personas en los Estados Unidos que recibieron uno o más mensajes de texto enviados
por Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., Hollister Co., Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Gilly Hicks, y/o abercrombie kids, o en
su nombre, entre el 25 de agosto de 2010 y el 18 de diciembre de 2015. Todas estas personas constituyen el “Grupo del
Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva” o los “Miembros del grupo del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva”.
Se excluyen del Grupo del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva (a) los Demandados, sus ejecutivos, directores y
familiares directos; (b) los Abogados del Grupo de la demanda colectiva; y (c) a los jueces que han presidido el litigio
y sus familiares directos.
7. ¿Qué ocurre si no estoy seguro de ser parte del Acuerdo de conciliación?
Si no está seguro de ser parte del Grupo del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva o si tiene alguna otra pregunta
relacionada con el Acuerdo, visite la página web del Acuerdo en www.AFTCPAsettlement.com o llame al número
gratuito 1-877-866-0631. También puede enviar preguntas al Administrador del Acuerdo a Chimeno-Buzzi Text
Settlement Administrator, PO Box 3656, Portland, OR 97208-3656.
LOS BENEFICIOS DEL ACUERDO
8. ¿Qué estipula el Acuerdo?
Los Demandados han aceptado pagar USD 10 millones para crear un “Fondo del Acuerdo”. Este Fondo del Acuerdo
será utilizado para pagar todos los costos del Acuerdo, incluidos los costos de las notificaciones y de administración, el
monto de los honorarios de los abogados y el monto de los servicios a los Representantes del grupo de la demanda
colectiva. El “Fondo neto del Acuerdo” restante será distribuido como pagos en efectivo a los Miembros del Acuerdo
de la demanda colectiva que presenten reclamaciones válidas. Los pagos en efectivo serán distribuidos de manera
prorrateada a los reclamantes válidos, según sea la cantidad de reclamaciones válidas presentadas. Cada uno de los
Miembros del grupo del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva podrá presentar únicamente una reclamación válida y recibir
únicamente un pago en efectivo.
Además, dentro de un año de la Fecha de entrada en vigencia del Acuerdo, los Demandados aceptan brindar
capacitación con respecto al cumplimiento de la TCPA a los gerentes clave que sean responsables de las
comunicaciones por texto a los clientes.
9. ¿Cómo presento una reclamación?
Si usted reúne los requisitos para solicitar un pago en efectivo, debe completar y enviar un formulario válido de
reclamación. Puede presentar su formulario de reclamación por Internet en www.AFTCPAsettlement.com o
descargarlo de la página web y enviarlo por correo electrónico a [email protected] La fecha límite
para presentar una reclamación por Internet o por correo electrónico es 11:59 p. m. hora estándar del Pacífico (PST)
del 16 de mayo de 2016.
También puede presentar su formulario de reclamación por correo postal. Los formularios de reclamación que se
presenten por correo deberán tener fecha del sello postal no posterior al 16 de mayo de 2016 y estar dirigidos a:
¿TIENE ALGUNA PREGUNTA? LLAME AL 1-877-866-0631 O VISITE www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
4
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 44 of
67
Chimeno-Buzzi Text Settlement Administrator
PO Box 3656
Portland, OR 97208-3656
Sin distinción del método que elija para presentar su formulario de reclamación, sírvase leerlo con atención y brindar
toda la información solicitada. Solo podrá presentarse un formulario de reclamación por cada Miembro del grupo del
Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva.
10. ¿Cuándo recibiré mi pago?
Los pagos a los Miembros del grupo de la demanda colectiva que sean válidos, se efectuarán únicamente después de
que el Tribunal otorgue la “aprobación final” al Acuerdo y después de que todas las apelaciones sean resueltas (ver
“La Audiencia de imparcialidad del Tribunal” más adelante). Si hay apelaciones, resolverlas puede llevar tiempo.
Tenga paciencia.
CÓMO EXCLUIRSE DEL ACUERDO
Si usted no desea obtener los beneficios del Acuerdo, pero quiere conservar el derecho que pudiera tener para entablar
acciones judiciales contra los Demandados por los asuntos legales de este caso, entonces deberá tomar medidas para
excluirse del Acuerdo. Esto se conoce como excluirse u optar por salirse del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva.
11. ¿ Cómo Excluirse de la Conciliación?
Para excluirse del Acuerdo, debe enviar una carta u otro documento escrito por correo a:
Chimeno-Buzzi Text Settlement Administrator
PO Box 3656
Portland, OR 97208-3656
Su solicitud para ser excluido del Acuerdo deberá estar firmada por usted personalmente y deberá incluir una
declaración que indique su deseo de ser “excluido del Acuerdo de demanda colectiva” y que usted es “por otra parte
un miembro del Grupo del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva”.
Su solicitud de exclusión debe tener un sello postal que no sea posterior al 29 de febrero de 2016. No puede excluirse
por teléfono, correo electrónico ni en el sitio web.
Puede excluirse del Grupo del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva únicamente por usted mismo. No están permitidas las
denominadas exclusiones en “masa” o de “clase”, presentadas por terceros en nombre de los Miembros de un grupo de
demanda colectiva en “masa” o de “clase” o múltiples Miembros de un grupo de demanda colectiva, donde no se haya
firmado ninguna declaración personal por parte de cada uno y todos los Miembros individuales del grupo de la
demanda colectiva.
12. Si no me excluyo, ¿puedo iniciar acciones legales contra los demandados por lo
mismo más adelante?
No. A menos que se excluya, usted renuncia a todo derecho que pudiera tener de iniciar un juicio contra los
Demandados por las reclamaciones legales que el Acuerdo resuelve. Usted debe excluirse del Grupo de la Conciliación
con el fin de tratar de continuar su propio litigio. Si usted inicia su propio juicio, deberá contratar a su propio abogado
y deberá probar sus reclamaciones.
¿TIENE ALGUNA PREGUNTA? LLAME AL 1-877-866-0631 O VISITE www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
5
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 45 of
67
13. ¿A qué renuncio para mantenerme en el Grupo de Conciliación?
A menos que se excluya del Acuerdo, usted no podrá demandar ni ser parte de ninguna otra acción judicial contra los
Demandados con respecto a los asuntos en este caso, incluido todo litigio, arbitraje o procedimiento existente. A
menos que se excluya, todas las decisiones y sentencias del Tribunal serán vinculantes para usted. Si presenta un
formulario de reclamación por beneficios o no realiza ninguna acción, usted eximirá a los Demandados de todas las
reclamaciones descritas e identificadas en la sección IX del Acuerdo de conciliación.
El Acuerdo de conciliación a está a su disposición en www.AFTCPAsettlement.com. El Acuerdo de conciliación
brinda más detalles sobre la exoneración y describe las demandas que quedarán sin efecto con detalles específicos,
usando terminología legal exacta y necesaria; por lo tanto, léalo detenidamente. Si tiene preguntas sobre las
reclamaciones exentas o lo que estas significan, puede hablar sin costo alguno con las firmas de abogados que
representan al Grupo de demandantes, indicadas en la pregunta 15 o bien puede hablar con su propio abogado a su
cargo.
14. Si me excluyo, ¿igual podré recibir un pago?
No. Si se excluye del Acuerdo no recibirá ningún pago proveniente del Fondo del Acuerdo.
LOS ABOGADOS QUE LO REPRESENTAN
15. ¿Tengo un abogado en esta causa?
El Tribunal designó a los siguientes abogados como “Abogados del grupo de la demanda colectiva” para representar a
todos los miembros del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva.
Robert R. Ahdoot
AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
1016 Palm Avenue
West Hollywood, CA 90069
Frank S. Hedin
CAREY RODRIGUEZ MILIAN
GONYA, LLP
1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 700
Miami, FL 33131
Joseph J. Siprut
SIPRUT PC
17 North State Street, Suite 1600
Chicago, IL 60602
No se le cobrará por los servicios de estos abogados. Si quiere que lo represente otro abogado puede contratar, por su
propia cuenta, a uno que comparezca ante el Tribunal.
16. ¿Cómo se les pagará a los abogados?
Los Abogados del Grupo de la demanda colectiva pretenden solicitar hasta el treinta y cinco por ciento (35 %) del
valor del Acuerdo para los honorarios de los abogados, más el reintegro de los gastos razonables, reales y
extraordinarios que se hayan efectuado en el litigio. Los honorarios y costos fijados por el Tribunal se pagarán del
Fondo del acuerdo. El Tribunal determinará la cantidad de honorarios y gastos a conceder.
Los Abogados del Grupo de la demanda colectiva también solicitarán que se pague un monto por servicios de hasta
$5,000 cada uno proveniente del Fondo del Acuerdo a los Representantes del Grupo de la demanda colectiva por sus
servicios como representantes en nombre de todo el Grupo del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva.
¿TIENE ALGUNA PREGUNTA? LLAME AL 1-877-866-0631 O VISITE www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
6
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 46 of
67
OBJECIONES AL ACUERDO
17. ¿Cómo le hago saber al Tribunal que no me agrada el Acuerdo?
Si es un Miembro del Acuerdo de la demanda colectiva (y no se excluye del Grupo de la demanda colectiva), puede
objetar cualquier parte del Acuerdo. Para objetar, debe enviar una carta u otro documento escrito que contenga lo
siguiente:
1) Un encabezamiento que incluya el nombre y número de caso, Anamaria Chimeno-Buzzi & Lakedrick Reed v.
Hollister Co. & Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Caso n.º 14-cv-23120-MGC.
2) Su nombre, domicilio, número telefónico y, si está representado por un abogado, el nombre, número del
colegio de abogados, domicilio y número telefónico de su abogado.
3) Una declaración firmada que manifieste, bajo pena de perjurio, que usted es miembro del Grupo del Acuerdo
de la demanda colectiva.
4) Una declaración de todas sus objeciones al Acuerdo, incluyendo el motivo y fundamento legal para cada
objeción.
5) Una declaración con respecto a si usted tiene la intención de comparecer en la Audiencia de imparcialidad, con
o sin abogado, y si es con abogado, el nombre, número del colegio de abogados, domicilio y número telefónico
de su abogado que asistirá.
Deberá interponer su objeción ante el Tribunal (utilizando el sistema de presentación electrónica del Tribunal o de
alguna otra manera que el Tribunal lo acepte) y enviar su objeción a cada uno de los seis (6) domicilios siguientes, y su
objeción deberá tener la fecha del sello postal a más tardar el 29 de febrero de 2016:
SECRETARIO DEL TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRADOR
ABOGADO DE LOS DEMANDADOS
Clerk of the Court
Chimeno-Buzzi Text Settlement
Administrator
P.O. Box 3656
Portland, OR 97208-3656
Meredith Slawe
DRINKER, BIDDLE & REATH, LLP
ONE Logan Square, Suite 2000
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Wilkie D. Ferguson, Jr.
United States District Courthouse
400 North Miami Avenue
Miami, FL 33128
ABOGADOS DEL GRUPO DE DEMANDANTES
Robert R. Ahdoot
AHDOOT & WOLFSON,
PC1016 Palm Avenue
West Hollywood, CA 90069
Frank S. Hedin
CAREY RODRIGUEZ MILIAN
GONYA, LLP
1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 700
Miami, FL 33131
Joseph J. Siprut
SIPRUT PC
17 North State Street, Suite 1600
Chicago, IL 60620
18. ¿Cuál es la diferencia entre objetar y excluirse?
Objetar es simplemente decirle al Tribunal que no le gusta algo sobre la Conciliación. Puede objetar la Conciliación
solamente si no se excluye de esta. Excluirse es decirle al Tribunal que no quiere ser parte de la Conciliación. Si usted
se excluye, no tiene fundamentos para objetar esta Conciliación porque esta ya no lo afecta.
¿TIENE ALGUNA PREGUNTA? LLAME AL 1-877-866-0631 O VISITE www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
7
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 47 of
67
LA AUDIENCIA DE IMPARCIALIDAD DEL TRIBUNAL
El Tribunal celebrará una audiencia para decidir si aprueba el Acuerdo y las solicitudes de honorarios y gastos
(“Audiencia de imparcialidad”).
19. ¿Cuándo y dónde decidirá el Tribunal si aprueba el Acuerdo de conciliación?
El Tribunal ha programado una Audiencia de imparcialidad para el 30 de marzo de 2016 a las 11:30 a. m., en el
Tribunal de Distrito de los Estados Unidos para el Distrito Sur de Florida, Wilkie D. Ferguson, Jr. Palacio de Justicia
de los Estados Unidos, Sala 11-2, 400 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida 33128. La audiencia se podrá cambiar
para otra fecha u hora sin notificación previa; por lo tanto, sugerimos verificar en www.AFTCPAsettlement.com si hay
actualizaciones. En esta audiencia, el Tribunal considerará si el Acuerdo es justo, razonable y adecuado. Además, el
Tribunal considerará las solicitudes de los Abogados del grupo de la demanda colectiva acerca de los honorarios y
gastos de los abogados y los montos por Servicios para los Representantes del Grupo de la demanda colectiva. Si hay
objeciones, el Tribunal las examinará en ese momento. Después de la audiencia, el Tribunal decidirá si aprueba o no el
Acuerdo. No se sabe cuánto tiempo tomarán estas decisiones.
20. ¿Debo asistir a la audiencia?
No. Los Abogados del grupo de demandantes responderán todas las preguntas que el Tribunal pueda hacer. Sin
embargo, si lo desea puede asistir a la audiencia, a su propio cargo. Si envía una objeción, no es necesario que asista al
Tribunal para hablar al respecto. Siempre que haya presentado su objeción por escrito a tiempo, al domicilio correcto,
y que cumpla con los demás requisitos que se describen anteriormente, el Tribunal la considerará. También puede
pagar su propio abogado para que asista a la audiencia, pero no es necesario.
21. ¿Puedo intervenir en la audiencia?
Puede solicitarle al Tribunal permiso para hablar en la audiencia de imparcialidad. Para hacerlo, su objeción presentada
deberá incluir una declaración con respecto a si usted tiene la intención de comparecer en la Audiencia de
imparcialidad (Ver la pregunta 17 más arriba).
No puede hablar en la audiencia si se ha excluido del Acuerdo.
SI DECIDE NO HACER NADA
22. ¿Qué sucede si no hago nada?
Si es un Miembro del grupo de la demanda colectiva y no hace nada, no obtendrá ningún beneficio de este Acuerdo. Y,
a menos que se excluya, estará obligado por la sentencia dictada por el Tribunal. Esto significa que no podrá iniciar
una acción legal, seguir adelante con una acción legal ni ser parte de cualquier otra acción legal contra los Demandados
respecto de las declaraciones y reclamaciones que son objeto de este caso.
CÓMO OBTENER MÁS INFORMACIÓN
23. ¿Cómo obtengo más información?
Esta notificación resume el Acuerdo de conciliación propuesto. Encontrará más detalles en el Acuerdo de
conciliación. Para ver una declaración completa y definitiva de los términos del Acuerdo, consulte el
Acuerdo de conciliación en www.AFTCPAsettlement.com. También puede escribir para formular sus
preguntas al Administrador del Acuerdo a Chimeno-Buzzi Text Settlement Administrator, PO Box 3656,
Portland, OR 97208-3656, o llamar al número gratuito 1-877-866-0631.
¿TIENE ALGUNA PREGUNTA? LLAME AL 1-877-866-0631 O VISITE www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
8
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 48 of
67
Attachment 4
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 49 of
67
Komraus, Kathleen
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Komraus, Kathleen
Thursday, March 10, 2016 4:33 PM
Komraus, Kathleen
FW: HTML Sample -- Legal Notice about the Chimeno-Buzzi v. Hollister Class Action
Settlement
From: Chimeno-Buzzi Text Settlement Administrator [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 9:45 AM
To:
Subject: HTML Sample -- Legal Notice about the Chimeno-Buzzi v. Hollister Class Action Settlement
Email Notice
If You Were Sent a Text Message from Hollister Co., Abercrombie
& Fitch Co., Gilly Hicks, and / or abercrombie kids, You May Be
Entitled to a Payment from a Class Action Settlement.
Si desea recibir esta notificación en español, llámenos o visite nuestra página web.
A Settlement with a fund of $10 Million Dollars has been reached in a class action lawsuit claiming that J.M.
Hollister, LLC d/b/a Hollister Co. and/or Abercrombie & Fitch Co. (the “Defendants”) sent text messages to wireless
telephone numbers without prior express written consent of the recipients in violation of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (“TCPA”). The Defendants deny the allegations in the lawsuit and the Court has not
decided who is right.
Who’s Included? You received this email because the Defendants’ records show that you may be a Settlement
Class Member. The Settlement includes all persons in the United States who received one or more text messages
sent by or on behalf of Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., Hollister Co., Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Gilly Hicks,
and/or abercrombie kids, between August 25, 2010 and December 18, 2015.
What Are the Settlement Terms? The Defendants have agreed to pay $10 million to create a Settlement Fund that
will be used to pay cash payments to individuals who submit valid claims, attorney fees, service awards, costs,
expenses, and settlement administration. The cash payments will be distributed on a pro rata basis depending on the
number of valid claims filed. Only one claim is allowed per Class Member. The Defendants will also implement
training concerning TCPA compliance.
How can I get a Payment? You can quickly file a claim online at www.AFTCPAsettlement.com. You may also
download a Claim Form from the website and submit your claim via email (at [email protected]) or
regular U.S. mail. The deadline to file a claim online or via email is 11:59 p.m. PST on May 16, 2016. If you send
in a Claim Form by regular mail, it must be postmarked on or before May 16, 2016.
Your Other Options. If you do not want to be legally bound by the Settlement, you must exclude yourself by
February 29, 2016. If you do not exclude yourself, you will release any claims you may have, as more fully
described in the Settlement Agreement, available at the settlement website. You may object to the Settlement by
February 29, 2016. The Detailed Notice available on the website listed below explains how to exclude yourself or
object. The Court will hold a Hearing on March 30, 2016 to consider whether to approve the Settlement and a
request for attorneys’ fees of up to 35% of the Settlement Fund and service awards of up to $5,000 each to the Class
Representatives. You may appear at the hearing, either yourself or through an attorney hired by you, but you don't
1
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 50 of
67
have to. For more information, call or visit the website.
www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
1-877-866-0631
SOURCE: United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Right-click here to download
pictures. To help protect y our
priv acy , Outlook prev ented
auto matic downlo ad o f this
picture from the Internet.
If you would prefer not to receive further messages from this sender, please Click Here and confirm your request.
2
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 51 of
67
Attachment 5
Legal Notice
If You146-1
Were Sent
a Text Message
ument
Entered
on FLSD
from Hollister Co., Abercrombie
67
& Fitch Co., Gilly Hicks, and / or
abercrombie kids, You May Be
Entitled to a Payment from
a Class Action Settlement.
Si desea recibir esta notificación en español,
llámenos o visite nuestra página web.
A Settlement has been reached in a class
action lawsuit about whether Hollister
Co. and/or Abercrombie & Fitch Co. (the
“Defendants”) sent text messages to wireless
telephone numbers without prior express
written consent of the recipients in violation
of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47
U.S.C. § 227 (“TCPA”). The Defendants deny
the allegations in the lawsuit and the Court has
not decided who is right.
Who’s Included? The Settlement includes
all persons in the United States who received
one or more text messages sent by or on behalf
of Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., Hollister
Co., Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Gilly Hicks and/
or abercrombie kids, between August 25, 2010
and December 18, 2015.
What Are the Settlement Terms? The
Defendants have agreed to pay $10 million to
create a Settlement Fund that will be used to
pay cash payments to individuals who submit a
valid claim, attorney fees, service awards, costs,
expenses and settlement administration. The
cash payments will be distributed on a pro rata
basis depending on the number of valid claims
filed. Only one claim is allowed per Class
Member. The Defendants will also implement
training concerning TCPA compliance.
How can I get a Payment? You can quickly
file a claim online at www.AFTCPAsettlement.
com. You may also download a Claim Form
and submit your claim via email (at [email protected]
AFTCPAsettlement.com) or regular U.S. mail.
The deadline to file a claim online or via email
is 11:59 p.m. PST on May 16, 2016. If you
send in a Claim Form by regular mail, it must
be postmarked on or before May 16, 2016.
Your Other Options. If you do not want to
be legally bound by the Settlement, you must
exclude yourself by February 29, 2016. If you
do not exclude yourself, you will release any
claims you may have, as more fully described
in the Settlement Agreement, available at the
settlement website. You may object to the
Settlement by February 29, 2016. A Detailed
Notice available on the website explains how
to exclude yourself or object. The Court will
hold a Hearing on March 30, 2016 to consider
whether to approve the Settlement and a
request for attorneys’ fees of up to 35% of the
Settlement Fund and service awards of up to
$5,000 each to the Class Representatives. You
may appear at the hearing, either yourself or
through an attorney hired by you, but you don’t
have to. For more information, call or visit
the website.
1-877-866-0631
www.AFTCPAsettlement.com
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 53 of
67
Attachment 6
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 54 of
67
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 55 of
67
Attachment 7
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 56 of
67
DISPLAY – 300X250
2
© 2014, Conversant, Inc. All rights reserved.
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 57 of
67
Attachment 8
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 58 of
67
Hollister ‐ Sponsored Search Keywords
Abercrombie Settlement
Abercrombie & Fitch Settlement
Hollister Settlement
Gilly Hicks Settlement
Abercrombie Kids Settlement
Abercrombie TCPA Settlement
Abercrombie & Fitch TCPA Settlement
Hollister TCPA Settlement
Gilly Hicks TCPA Settlement
Abercrombie Kids TCPA Settlement
Abercrombie Class Action
Abercrombie & Fitch Class Action
Hollister Class Action
Gilly Hicks Class Action
Abercrombie Kids Class Action
Abercrombie TCPA Class Action
Abercrombie & Fitch TCPA Class Action
Hollister TCPA Class Action
Gilly Hicks TCPA Class Action
Abercrombie Kids TCPA Class Action
Abercrombie Class Action Settlement
Abercrombie & Fitch Class Action Settlement
Hollister Class Action Settlement
Gilly Hicks Class Action Settlement
Abercrombie Kids Class Action Settlement
Abercrombie TCPA Class Action Settlement
Abercrombie & Fitch TCPA Class Action Settlement
Hollister TCPA Class Action Settlement
Gilly Hicks TCPA Class Action Settlement
Abercrombie Kids TCPA Class Action Settlement
Abercrombie Lawsuit
Abercrombie & Fitch Lawsuit
Hollister Lawsuit
Gilly Hicks Lawsuit
Abercrombie Kids Lawsuit
Abercrombie TCPA Lawsuit
Abercrombie & Fitch TCPA Lawsuit
Hollister TCPA Lawsuit
Gilly Hicks TCPA Lawsuit
Abercrombie Kids TCPA Lawsuit
Abercrombie Litigation
Abercrombie & Fitch Litigation
Hollister Litigation
Gilly Hicks Litigation
Abercrombie Kids Litigation
Abercrombie TCPA Litigation
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 59 of
67
Abercrombie & Fitch TCPA Litigation
Hollister TCPA Litigation
Gilly Hicks TCPA Litigation
Abercrombie Kids TCPA Litigation
Abercrombie Claims
Abercrombie & Fitch Claims
Hollister Claims
Gilly Hicks Claims
Abercrombie Kids Claims
Abercrombie TCPA Claims
Abercrombie & Fitch TCPA Claims
Hollister TCPA Claims
Gilly Hicks TCPA Claims
Abercrombie Kids TCPA Claims
Text Message Settlement
TCPA Settlement
Telephone Consumer Protection Act Settlement
TCPA Text Message Settlement
Text Message Class Action
TCPA Class Action
Telephone Consumer Protection Act Class Action
TCPA Text Message Class Action
Text Message Class Action Settlement
TCPA Class Action Settlement
Telephone Consumer Protection Act Class Action Settlement
TCPA Text Message Class Action Settlement
Text Message Lawsuit
TCPA Lawsuit
Telephone Consumer Protection Act Lawsuit
TCPA Text Message Lawsuit
Text Message Litigation
TCPA Litigation
Telephone Consumer Protection Act Litigation
TCPA Text Message Litigation
Text Message Claims
TCPA Claims
Telephone Consumer Protection Act Claims
TCPA Text Message Claims
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 60 of
67
Attachment 9
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 61 of
67
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 62 of
67
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 63 of
67
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 64 of
67
Attachment 10
:14-cv-23120-MGC
146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Pag
Chimeno-Buzzi TextDocument
Settlement Administrator
67
PO Box 3656
Portland, OR 97208-3656
Claim Form
To submit a claim please fill out the form below. The deadline to submit this form is May 16, 2016. You may also submit a
Claim Form online at www.AFTCPAsettlement.com.
First Name
MI
Last Name
Address
City
State
ZIP Code
Cell Phone Number (The number that received the text message(s)).
-
-
Email Address:
I declare under penalty of perjury that, to the best of my knowledge, I received one (1) or more text messages sent by or on
behalf of Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. or its affiliates, including Hollister Co., Abercrombie & Fitch Co., Gilly Hicks,
and/or abercrombie kids, without my consent.
Signature: Date (MM/DD/YY):
Questions? Visit www.AFTCPAsettlement.com or call 1-877-866-0631
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 66 of
67
Attachment 11
Case 1:14-cv-23120-MGC Document 146-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2016 Page 67 of
Chimeno-Buzzi
67 v Hollister
Opt Out List
Tracking Number
334452
1008937
1432916
2075165
2625155
2775977
2988396
3966247
4054021
4284979
Document Status
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Epiq | Class Action Mass Tort Solutions
First Name
DWITI
SARAH
VICTORIA
MISTIE
MELISSA
HUANG
MICHAEL
TYLER
MATT
KRISTIAN
Last Name
PATEL
LINK
CATTELONA
COBLE
PEDEVILLANO
XINGQING
DARMAS
PHILLIPS
BUTLER
MIERZWICKI
Affected Phone Number
5176487506
4346370651
9083078668
7047967631
2039068911
7027888347
2567940688
3213322369
9196754415
N/A
03/17/2016

Documentos relacionados