Judge Lucy Koh of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California has accepted a revised settlement offer from the two parties in the case, which would end the Silicon Valley worker poaching class-action suit. The $415 million counter-offer is $90 million more than the older deal, and exceeds what the judge asked for to approve the deal. Focusing dissent on what attorneys and a objector asked for individually, Judge Koh has set the next hearing for July 9, which should end the case once and for all.
The plaintiffs and the remaining defendants reached an agreement on a settlement of $324.5 million, but Koh rejected the offer. She was concerned that the fund didn't pay enough money to the remaining employees in the class. Koh did give guidance on what she thought was an acceptable fund amount, declaring that $380 million should be sufficient, $55.5 million more than the proposal. The latest agreement hammered out between Adobe, Apple, Google and Intel exceeded the judge's guidance.
The lead attorney firm is seeking $81 million in fees, which will be deducted from the pool to be paid to class members. It appears the judge is allowing the fees, and issued no comment on the request.
It is unclear who began the informal agreement between the various tech companies, which originally included other players such as Microsoft, Oracle, Comcast and Pixar, but the case was cracked open by the discovery of a
series of emails between Apple's CEO Steve Jobs and Google founder Sergey Brin, forging an agreement following a series of disruptive recruiting attempts on each other's employees.
The defendant companies
are appealing Judge Koh's initial ruling, saying that she committed "clear legal error" in imposing her own assessment of the value of the case. If a new agreement is not reached, a case-management conference is set for November 19 and a pre-trial hearing for December 19. The trial is set to commence on April 9.
Koh's only objections to the new settlement were for one firm's work representing one of the four original complainants, Michael Devine, and for Devine's own request for recompense. Firm Girard Gibbs, representing Devine, asked for $4.5 million in fees, which the judge objected to, asking if the amount was warranted "for doing two briefs and appearing at two hearings." Koh suggested that even $500,000 for the work performed by the late-addition firm was too great.
Devine sought $160,000 for being a class representative, and then as an objector to the settlement. His attorneys claimed that he was entitled to the boost, as his objections took more courage than the original four filers. Koh didn't rule on either the law firm's request, or Devine's request, saying that "I don't want to keep subtracting more money from the class. But I'll allow it at least to be argued."
Top