Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST—N.D. Cal.: Settlements totaling $541M obtain final approval in cathode ray tube case, (Jul 8, 2016)
Law Firms Mentioned:Farmer Brownstein Jaeger LLP | Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP | Kirkland & Ellis LLP | Polsinelli Shughart PC | Weil, Gotshal and Manges LLP | White & Case LLP
Organizations Mentioned:Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd. | Gibson Dunn | Hitachi America, Ltd. | Hitachi, Ltd. | Kirkland & Ellis, LLP | Pearson Simon & Warshaw, LLP | Polsinelli, PC | Saveri & Saveri, Inc. | Weil Gotshal & Manges, LLP | White & Case, LLP
By Greg Hammond, J.D.
Six proposed settlements, totaling more than $541 million, have received final approval by the federal district court in San Francisco, resolving price fixing claims against manufacturers of cathode ray tubes (CRTs), brought by indirect purchasers of CRTs. The court adopted a special master’s report and recommendation, which found that the settlements were fair, reasonable, and adequate (In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, July 7, 2016, Tigar, J.).
In 2007, a group of retailers filed a series of class action suits against numerous CRT manufacturers, asserting price fixing conspiracy claims under the Sherman Act and various state laws. They alleged that they were indirect purchasers of CRTs made by the defendant manufacturers that were ultimately incorporated into finished products. The settling defendant manufacturers include Philips, Panasonic, Hitachi, Toshiba, Samsung SDI, Thomson, and TDA. Prior settlements with Chunghwa and LG bring the total indirect purchaser plaintiffs class settlement amount to $576.75 million.
The settlements require Philips, Panasonic, Hitachi, Toshiba, Samsung SDI, Thomson, and TDA to pay more than $541 million into a combined settlement fund.
The court played down the cumulative amount of the settlement, which the indirect purchaser plaintiffs and special master promoted as the "second largest cash recovery ever obtained on behalf of indirect purchasers." In particular, the court noted that the settlement represents only 20 percent of the alleged injury, whereas the potential recovery in In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Lit., No. M 07-1827 SI (N.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2013) was 50 percent of the potential recovery. "Nonetheless, while the settlement might not be as exceptional or extraordinary as its proponents claim, the proposed aggregate settlement here is without question a good recovery and firmly in line with the recoveries in other cases," the court stated.
Chunghwa settlement. The court, however, determined that new notice is required with regard to the Chunghwa settlement, with an opportunity for resellers to object. The Chunghwa notice was amended to state that the net settlement funds will be distributed to claimants in 24 states pro rata in accordance with those states’ respective populations in 2000. The court authorized distribution of this new notice, noting that it was the best possible notice.
The court stayed the distribution of funds from any of the eight settlements, pending final approval of the Chunghwa settlement after a fairness hearing scheduled for November 14, 2016. In addition, the court reserved all issues relating to attorney fees, expenses, and incentive awards for a future order.
The case is No. C-07-5944 JST.
Attorneys: Bruce Lee Simon (Pearson Simon & Warshaw, LLP), Guido Saveri (Saveri & Saveri, Inc.) and Christopher Wilson (Polsinelli Shughart PC) for Crago, Inc. Joel Steven Sanders (Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP), Adam C. Hemlock (Weil, Gotshal and Manges LLP) and David C. Brownstein (Farmer Brownstein Jaeger LLP) for Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd. Eliot A. Adelson (Kirkland & Ellis LLP) and Christopher M. Curran (White & Case LLP) for Hitachi, Ltd. and Hitachi America, Ltd.
Companies: Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd.; Hitachi, Ltd.; Hitachi America, Ltd.
Cases: Antitrust CaliforniaNews