{"cached_at":"2026-10-24T10:50:20.251235+00:00","cl_docket_id":"67605120","docket":{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","id":67605120,"court":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/courts/txnd/","court_id":"txnd","original_court_info":null,"idb_data":null,"clusters":[],"audio_files":[],"assigned_to":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/people/352/","referred_to":null,"bankruptcy_information":null,"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2023-07-13T09:20:10.782789-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-31T17:43:52.736667-07:00","source":1,"appeal_from_str":"","assigned_to_str":"Jane J Boyle","referred_to_str":"","panel_str":"","date_last_index":"2023-07-14T05:41:07.466248-07:00","date_cert_granted":null,"date_cert_denied":null,"date_argued":null,"date_reargued":null,"date_reargument_denied":null,"date_filed":"2023-07-13","date_terminated":"2024-12-20","date_last_filing":"2025-03-13","case_name_short":"Fitton","case_name":"Fitton v. Pinnacle Propane LLC","case_name_full":"","slug":"fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc","docket_number":"3:23-cv-01559","docket_number_core":"2301559","docket_number_raw":"3:23-cv-01559","docket_number_source":0,"federal_dn_office_code":"3","federal_dn_case_type":"cv","federal_dn_judge_initials_assigned":"B","federal_dn_judge_initials_referred":"","federal_defendant_number":null,"pacer_case_id":"379017","cause":"28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract","nature_of_suit":"190 Contract: Other Contract","jury_demand":"Plaintiff","jurisdiction_type":"Diversity","appellate_fee_status":"","appellate_case_type_information":"","mdl_status":"","filepath_ia":"","filepath_ia_json":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"ia_needs_upload":true,"ia_date_first_change":"2023-07-13T09:20:10.781614-07:00","date_blocked":null,"blocked":false,"appeal_from":null,"parent_docket":null,"tags":[],"panel":[]},"parties":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/14845365/","id":14845365,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9975933/","attorney_id":9975933,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","docket_id":67605120,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9975933/","attorney_id":9975933,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","docket_id":67605120,"role":2}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","docket_id":67605120,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.237350-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.237359-08:00","name":"Pinnacle Propane LLC","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/14845364/","id":14845364,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9975931/","attorney_id":9975931,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","docket_id":67605120,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9975931/","attorney_id":9975931,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","docket_id":67605120,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9975932/","attorney_id":9975932,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","docket_id":67605120,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","docket_id":67605120,"name":"Plaintiff","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.094892-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.094906-08:00","name":"Amanda Fitton","extra_info":""}],"entries":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/419207877/","id":419207877,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/433111925/","id":433111925,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/37/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2025-03-13T13:10:14.001699-07:00","date_modified":"2025-03-13T13:10:14.006338-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"37","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177017536174","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-03-13T13:10:13.979523-07:00","date_modified":"2025-03-13T13:10:13.985793-07:00","date_filed":"2025-03-13","time_filed":"15:02:12","entry_number":37,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-03-13.001","pacer_sequence_number":96,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/411754094/","id":411754094,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/424920238/","id":424920238,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/34/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-20T15:20:14.466473-08:00","date_modified":"2025-12-25T11:54:49.896157-08:00","sha1":"fcc0b81dd8555e0f9e8addfc86926371f6d8225b","page_count":13,"file_size":135447,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.34.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.34.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 1 of 13 PageID 621\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nAMANDA FITTON, on behalf of herself and\nall others similarly situated, Case No. 3:23-cv-1559\n\n Plaintiff,\n\nv.\n\nPINNACLE PROPANE, LLC,\n\n Defendant.\n\n\n ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF\u2019S UNOPPOSED\n MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT\n\n Before the Court is Plaintiff Amanda Fitton (\u201cPlaintiff\u201d)\u2019s Motion for Final Approval of\n\nClass Action Settlement (\u201cMotion for Final Approval\u201d) (Doc. 29) and Motion for Attorneys\u2019 Fees,\n\nCosts, and Expenses to Settlement Class Counsel, and Service Award Payment to Plaintiff (\u201cMotion\n\nfor Attorneys\u2019 Fees\u201d) (Doc. 28). Having reviewed and considered the Stipulation and Settlement\n\nAgreement (the \u201cSettlement Agreement\u201d) between Plaintiff and Defendant Pinnacle Propane, LLC\n\n(\u201cPinnacle,\u201d and together with Plaintiff, the \u201cParties\u201d), the Motions, and having conducted a Final\n\nApproval Hearing, the Court makes the findings and grants the relief set forth below approving the\n\nSettlement upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Order.\n\n On June 26, 2024, the Court entered an Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Class\n\nAction Settlement (\u201cPreliminary Approval Order\u201d) (Doc. 26) which, among other things: (a)\n\nconditionally certified this matter as a class action for purposes of the Settlement, (b) appointed\n\nPlaintiff as the Settlement Class Representative and appointed Raina Borrelli of the law firm Strauss\n\nBorrelli PLLC as Settlement Class Counsel; (c) preliminarily approved the Settlement Agreement;\n\n\n 1\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 2 of 13 PageID 622\n\n\n\n(d) approved the form and manner of Notice to the Settlement Class; (d) set deadlines for opt-\n\nouts and objections; (e) approved and appointed the Settlement Administrator; and (f) set the\n\ndate for the Final Approval Hearing.\n\n Pursuant to the Notice requirements set forth in the Settlement Agreement and in the\n\nPreliminary Approval Order, the Settlement Class was notified of the terms of the proposed\n\nSettlement Agreement, of the right of Settlement Class Members to opt out, and the right of\n\nSettlement Class Members to object to the Settlement Agreement and to be heard at a Final\n\nApproval Hearing.\n\n On December 19, 2024, the Court held a Final Approval Hearing to determine, inter alia:\n\n(1) whether the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement are fair, reasonable, and adequate\n\nfor the release of the claims contemplated by the Settlement Agreement; and (2) whether judgment\n\nshould be entered dismissing this action with prejudice.\n\n The Court has (i) given an opportunity to be heard to all Settlement Class Members in\n\naccordance with the Preliminary Approval Order; (ii) reviewed the submissions presented with\n\nrespect to the proposed Settlement Agreement; (ii) held the Final Approval Hearing; (iv)\n\ndetermined that the Settlement Agreement is fair, adequate, and reasonable; (v) considered the\n\napplication made by Settlement Class Counsel for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and expenses, and the\n\napplication for a Service Award Payment to the Representative Plaintiff. Having reviewed the\n\nmaterials in support thereof, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, DECREED, AND ADJUDGED AS\n\nFOLLOWS:\n\n 1. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and over all claims\n\nraised therein and all Parties thereto, including the Settlement Class.\n\n\n\n 2\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 3 of 13 PageID 623\n\n\n\n 2. The Settlement does not constitute an admission of liability by Pinnacle, and the\n\nCourt expressly does not make any finding of liability or wrongdoing by Pinnacle or any other\n\nPerson.\n\n 3. Unless otherwise indicated, terms in this Final Judgment and Order Approving Class\n\nAction Settlement (\u201cFinal Approval Order and Judgment\u201d) with initial capital letters have the same\n\nmeaning as set forth in the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 4. The Court, having reviewed the terms of the Settlement Agreement submitted by the\n\nParties pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (\u201cFRCP\u201d) Rule 23(e)(2), grants final approval\n\nof the Settlement, and for purposes of the Settlement and this Final Approval Order and Judgment\n\nonly, the Court hereby finally certifies the Settlement Class.\n\n 5. The Settlement was entered into in good faith following arm\u2019s-length negotiations\n\nand is not collusive. The Settlement is in the best interests of the Settlement Class and is therefore\n\napproved. The Court finds that the Parties faced significant risks, expenses, delays, and uncertainties,\n\nincluding as to the outcome, including on appeal, of continued litigation of this complex matter,\n\nwhich further supports the Court\u2019s finding that the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable,\n\nadequate, and in the best interests of the Settlement Class Members. The Court finds that the\n\nuncertainties of continued litigation in both the trial and appellate courts, as well as the expense\n\nassociated with it, weigh in favor of approval of the settlement reflected in the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 6. The Court affirms and incorporates herein by reference its preliminary conclusions\n\nas to the satisfaction of FRCP Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) set forth in the Preliminary Approval\n\nOrder and notes that because this certification of the Settlement Class is in connection with\n\nthe Settlement Agreement rather than litigation, the Court need not address any issues of\n\n\n\n 3\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 4 of 13 PageID 624\n\n\n\nmanageability that may be presented by certification of the Settlement Class proposed in the\n\nSettlement Agreement.\n\n 7. The terms of the Settlement Agreement are fair, reasonable, and adequate, and are\n\nhereby approved, adopted, and incorporated by the Court. Notice of the terms of the Settlement,\n\nthe rights of Settlement Class Members under the Settlement, the Final Approval Hearing, Plaintiff\u2019s\n\napplication for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and expenses, and the Service Award Payment to the Settlement\n\nClass Representative has been provided to Settlement Class Members as directed by this Court\u2019s\n\nOrders, and proof of Notice has been filed with the Court. Defendant has complied with the\n\nrequirements of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (\u201cCAFA\u201d), 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1715.\n\n 8. The Court finds that the Notice, set forth in the Settlement Agreement and\n\neffectuated pursuant to the Preliminary Approval Order, was the best notice practicable under the\n\ncircumstances, was reasonably calculated to provide and did provide due and sufficient notice to the\n\nSettlement Class of the pendency of the Action, certification of the Settlement Class for settlement\n\npurposes only, the existence and terms of the Settlement Agreement, and their right to object and\n\nto appear at the final approval hearing or to exclude themselves from the Settlement Agreement,\n\nand satisfied the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the United States\n\nConstitution, and other applicable law.\n\n 9. The Court finds that Defendant has fully complied with the notice requirements of\n\nthe Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1715.\n\n 10. As of the Opt-Out deadline, two potential Settlement Class Members have requested\n\nto be excluded from the Settlement. All Settlement Class Members who have not validly excluded\n\nthemselves from the Settlement Class are bound by this Final Approval Order and Judgment and\n\n\n\n 4\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 5 of 13 PageID 625\n\n\n\nthe Settlement Agreement.\n\n 11. All Settlement Class Members who have not objected to the Settlement Agreement\n\nin the manner provided in the Settlement Agreement are deemed to have waived any objections by\n\nappeal, collateral challenge, or otherwise.\n\n 12. The Court has considered all the documents filed in support of the Settlement, and\n\nhas fully considered all matters raised, all exhibits and affidavits filed, all evidence received at the\n\nFinal Approval Hearing, all other papers and documents comprising the record herein, and all oral\n\narguments presented to the Court.\n\n 13. The Parties, their respective attorneys, and the Settlement Administrator are hereby\n\ndirected to consummate the Settlement in accordance with this Final Approval Order and Judgment\n\nand the terms of the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 14. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, Pinnacle, the Settlement Administrator, and\n\nSettlement Class Counsel shall implement the Settlement in the manner and timeframe as set forth\n\nin the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 15. Within the time period set forth in the Settlement Agreement, the relief provided\n\nfor in the Settlement Agreement shall be made available to the various Settlement Class Members\n\nsubmitting valid Claim Forms, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 16. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, Plaintiff and the Settlement Class Members\n\nrelease claims against Defendant and all Released Persons, as defined in the Settlement Agreement,\n\nas follows:\n\n Upon Final Approval of this Settlement Agreement, Settlement Class members release, acquit, and\n forever discharge Pinnacle and all of its respective past, present, and future parent companies,\n partnerships, subsidiaries, affiliates, divisions, employees, servants, members, providers, partners,\n principals, directors, shareholders, and owners, and all of their respective attorneys, heirs, executors,\n administrators, insures, coinsurers, reinsurers, joint ventures, personal representatives, predecessors,\n\n 5\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 6 of 13 PageID 626\n\n\n\n successors, transferees, trustees, and assigns, and includes, without limitation, any Person related to\n any such entities who is, was, or could have been named as a defendant in the Action, as well as\n covered entities associated with the Data Incident (\u201cReleased Parties\u201d) from all liabilities, rights,\n claims, actions, causes of action, demands, damages, penalties, costs, attorneys\u2019 fees, losses, and\n remedies, whether known or unknown, existing or potential, suspected or unsuspected, liquidated\n or unliquidated, legal, statutory, or equitable, that result from, arise out of, are based upon, or relate\n to any release of Private Information from the Data Incident, and conduct that was alleged or could\n have been alleged in the Litigation, including, without limitation, any claims, actions, causes of\n action, demands, damages, penalties, losses, or remedies relating to, based upon, resulting from, or\n arising out of the disclosure of Private Information from the Data Incident (the \u201cReleased Claims\u201d),\n provided that nothing in this Release is intended to, does or shall be deemed to release any claims\n not arising out of, based upon, resulting from, or related to the Data Incident.\n\n 17. Released Claims shall not include the right of any Settlement Class Member,\n\nPlaintiff\u2019s counsel, Settlement Class Counsel, or any of the Released Persons to enforce the terms of\n\nthe Settlement contained in the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 18. Upon the Effective Date, and to the fullest extent permitted by law, each Settlement\n\nClass Member, including Plaintiff, shall, either directly, indirectly, representatively, as a member of\n\nor on behalf of the general public or in any capacity, be permanently barred and enjoined from\n\ncommencing, prosecuting, pursuing, or participating in any recovery in any action in this or any\n\nother forum (other than participation in the Settlement as provided in the Settlement Agreement)\n\nin which any of the Released Claims is asserted.\n\n 19. On the Effective Date and in consideration of the promises and covenants set forth\n\nin the Settlement Agreement, (i) Plaintiff and each Settlement Class Member, and each of their\n\nrespective spouses and children with claims on behalf of the Settlement Class Member, executors,\n\nrepresentatives, guardians, wards, heirs, estates, successors, predecessors, next friends, co-borrowers,\n\nco-obligors, co-debtors, legal representatives, attorneys, agents, and assigns, and all those who claim\n\nthrough them or who assert claims (or could assert claims) on their behalf (including the government\n\nin the capacity as parens patriae or on behalf of creditors or estates of the releasors), and each of them\n\n\n\n 6\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 7 of 13 PageID 627\n\n\n\n(collectively and individually, the \u201cReleasing Persons\u201d), and (ii) Settlement Class Counsel and each\n\nof their past and present law firms, partners, or other employers, employees, agents, representatives,\n\nsuccessors, or assigns will be deemed to have, and by operation of this Final Order and Judgment\n\nshall have, fully, finally, completely, and forever released and discharged the Released Persons from\n\nthe Released Claims. The release set forth in the preceding sentence (the \u201cRelease\u201d) shall be included\n\nas part of any judgment, so that all Released Claims shall be barred by principles of res judicata,\n\ncollateral estoppel, and claim and issue preclusion.\n\n 20. Without in any way limiting the scope of the Release, the Release covers, without\n\nlimitation, any and all claims for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and expenses incurred by Settlement Class\n\nCounsel or any other counsel representing Plaintiff or Settlement Class Members, or any of them,\n\nin connection with or related in any manner to the Lawsuit, the Settlement, the administration of\n\nsuch Settlement and/or the Released Claims, as well as any and all claims for the Service Award to\n\nPlaintiff.\n\n 21. Subject to Court approval, as of the Effective Date, all Settlement Class Members\n\nshall be bound by the Settlement Agreement and the Release and all of their claims shall be\n\ndismissed with prejudice and released, irrespective of whether they received actual notice of the\n\nLawsuit or the Settlement.\n\n 22. As of the Effective Date, the Released Persons are deemed, by operation of the entry\n\nof this Final Order and Judgment, to have fully released and forever discharged Plaintiff, the\n\nSettlement Class Members, Settlement Class Counsel, or any other counsel representing Plaintiff or\n\nSettlement Class Members, or any of them, of and from any claims arising out of the Lawsuit or the\n\nSettlement. Any other claims or defenses Defendant or other Released Persons may have against\n\n\n\n 7\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 8 of 13 PageID 628\n\n\n\nPlaintiff, the Settlement Class Members, Settlement Class Counsel, or any other counsel\n\nrepresenting Plaintiff or Settlement Class Members, including, without limitation, any claims based\n\nupon or arising out of any employment, debtor-creditor, contractual, or other business relationship\n\nthat are not based upon or do not arise out of the institution, prosecution, assertion, settlement, or\n\nresolution of the Lawsuit or the Released Claims are not released, are specifically preserved, and\n\nshall not be affected by the preceding sentence.\n\n 23. As of the Effective Date, the Released Persons are deemed, by operation of entry of\n\nthe Final Order and Judgment, to have fully released and forever discharged each other of and from\n\nany claims they may have against each other arising from the claims asserted in the Lawsuit, including\n\nany claims arising out of the investigation, defense, or Settlement of the Lawsuit.\n\n 24. The Court grants final approval to the appointment of Plaintiff Amanda Fitton as\n\nSettlement Class Representative. The Court concludes that the Settlement Class Representative has\n\nfairly and adequately represented the Settlement Class and will continue to do so.\n\n 25. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, and in recognition of her efforts on behalf\n\nof the Settlement Class, the Court approves a payment to the Settlement Class Representative in\n\nthe amount of $5,000 as a Service Award Payment. Pinnacle shall make such payment in accordance\n\nwith the terms of the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 26. The Court grants final approval to the appointment of Raina Borrelli of the law firm\n\nStrauss Borrelli PLLC as Settlement Class Counsel. The Court concludes that Settlement Class\n\nCounsel has adequately represented the Settlement Class and will continue to do so.\n\n 27. The Court grants Settlement Class Counsel\u2019s application for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs,\n\nand expenses in the amount of $163,333.33 in fees and $18,668.33 in reasonable costs and expenses.\n\n\n\n 8\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 9 of 13 PageID 629\n\n\n\n\u201cMany courts . . . have concluded that the best approach [to determine attorneys\u2019 fees] is to use the\n\npercentage method in a common-fund . . . case with the lodestar method as a cross-check.\u201d In re\n\nHeartland, 851 F. Supp. 2d 1040, 1072\u201373. And in the Fifth Circuit, courts using \u201cthe percentage\n\nmethod to calculate attorneys\u2019 fees in common fund class actions must \u201ccross-check[]\u201d those results\n\nwith the so-called Johnson factors.\u201d In Re Apache Corp. Securities Litigation, No. 4:21-CV-00575, 2024\n\nWL 4881432, at *5 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 25, 2024) (quoting Union Asset Mgmt. Holding A.G. v. Dell, Inc.,\n\n669 F.3d 632, 644 (5th Cir. 2012)).\n\n Thirty-three percent represents an appropriate benchmark percentage here. The Fifth Circuit\n\n\u201cgive[s] district courts wide latitude\u201d to determine an appropriate percentage for attorneys\u2019 fees. In\n\nre Apache Corp., 2024 WL 4881432, at *4. Courts in the Fifth Circuit have recently awarded between\n\n18 and 33 percent in attorneys\u2019 fees. See id. (collecting cases). And while the percentage tends to\n\ndecrease as the total recovery for the class grows, In re Apache Corp., 2024 WL 4881432, at *4, here,\n\nthe $490,000 settlement fund is small compared to other class actions. This warrants a 33 percent\n\nbenchmark.\n\n Furthermore, a 33 percent award is fair and reasonable when cross-checked with the lodestar\n\nand Johnson analyses. The lodestar analysis calculates attorneys\u2019 fees by determining the attorneys\u2019\n\nhours billed. In re Heartland, 851 F. Supp. 2d at 1082. Applying the lodestar analysis as a cross-check\n\navoids windfalls by \u201censur[ing] that the percentage approach does not lead to a fee that represents\n\nan extraordinary lodestar multiple.\u201d Id. at 1086 (quotations omitted). The lodestar multiple results\n\nfrom comparing the lodestar\u2014i.e., hours billed\u2014with the fees sought. See Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v.\n\nHalliburton Co., No. 3:02-CV-1152-M, 2018 WL 1942227, at *8 (N.D. Tex. Apr. 25, 2018).\n\n Here, the lodestar cross-check supports awarding 33 percent attorneys\u2019 fees. At the Final\n\n\n 9\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 10 of 13 PageID 630\n\n\n\nApproval Hearing, Settlement Class Counsel testified that Counsel had provided over 140 hours of\n\nwork, resulting in a $91,000 lodestar. Based on the billing records before the Court, the hours billed\n\nwere for reasonably necessary legal work. See Doc. 28-2, Ex. A, 14\u201316. A 33 percent award results in\n\na 1.79 lodestar multiplier, which is reasonable in the Fifth Circuit. See, e.g., Burnett v. CallCore Media,\n\nInc., No. 4:21-CV-03176, 2024 WL 3166453, at *6 n.3 (S.D. Tex. June 25, 2024) (finding a lodestar\n\nmultiplier of less than three as \u201cwell within the range of reasonableness\u201d).\n\n Most Johnson factors, which are a \u201creasonableness check,\u201d also support a 33 percent award.\n\nSee Erica P. John Fund, 2018 WL 1942227, at *8; see also Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc., 488\n\nF.2d 714, 717\u201319 (5th Cir. 1974), overruled on other grounds, Blanchard v. Bergeron, 489 U.S. 87 (1989).\n\nAs discussed above, Settlement Class Counsel spent a combined 140 hours on pertinent legal work\n\nfor the case. And while settling early saved Counsel from dealing with the more complicated analysis\n\nrequired for dispositive motions, see In re Heartland, 851 F. Supp. 2d at 1083, quickly obtaining a\n\nfavorable settlement for the Settlement Class required skill. See id. A 33 percent award is also within\n\nthe customary range in the Fifth Circuit. See In re Apache Corp., 2024 WL 4881432, at *4 (collecting\n\ncases). Furthermore, Counsel worked under a contingency fee and risked losing time and money.\n\nPlaintiffs alleged an amount in controversy of up to $5 million. Counsel obtained about 10 percent\n\nof that, or $490,000. Fifth Circuit courts have upheld a 25 percent fee for attorneys obtaining only\n\n4.4% of estimated damages, so 33 percent is appropriate here. See id. at *6. Finally, Counsel detailed\n\ntheir vast class action experience, which they attested and demonstrated that they used to represent\n\nthe Settlement Class. See Doc. 28-2, Borrelli Decl., \u00b6\u00b6 27\u201345. While the novelty and difficulty of the\n\nlegal issues is neutral or slightly disfavors a large grant of attorneys\u2019 fees, the Court finds that all\n\nother relevant Johnson factors favor the 33 percent fee award.\n\n\n 10\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 11 of 13 PageID 631\n\n\n\n Lastly, the Court finds Class Counsel\u2019s costs and expenses of $18,668.33 reasonable.\n\nAccordingly, the Court grants Settlement Class Counsel\u2019s application for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and\n\nexpenses in the amount of $163,333.33 for fees and $18,668.33 for reasonable costs and expenses.\n\nPayment shall be made pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 28. This Final Approval Order and Judgment and the Settlement Agreement, and all\n\nacts, statements, documents, or proceedings relating to the Settlement Agreement are not, and shall\n\nnot be construed as, used as, or deemed to be evidence of, an admission by or against Pinnacle of\n\nany claim, any fact alleged in the Action, any fault, any wrongdoing, any violation of law, or any\n\nliability of any kind on the part of Pinnacle or of the validity or certifiability for litigation the\n\nSettlement Class or any claims that have been, or could have been, asserted in the Action. This Final\n\nApproval Order and Judgment, the Settlement Agreement, and all acts, statements, documents, or\n\nproceedings relating to the Settlement Agreement shall not be offered or received or be admissible\n\nin evidence in any action or proceeding, nor shall they be used in any way as an admission or\n\nconcession or evidence of any liability or wrongdoing of any nature or that Plaintiff, any Settlement\n\nClass Member, or any other person has suffered any damage; provided, however, that the Settlement\n\nAgreement and this Final Approval Order and Judgment may be filed in any action by Pinnacle,\n\nSettlement Class Counsel, or Settlement Class Members seeking to enforce the Settlement\n\nAgreement or the Final Approval Order and Judgment (including, but not limited to, enforcing\n\nthe releases contained herein). The Settlement Agreement and Final Approval Order and\n\nJudgment shall not be construed or admissible as an admission by Pinnacle that Plaintiff\u2019s claims or\n\nany similar claims are suitable for class treatment. The terms of the Settlement Agreement terms\n\nshall be forever binding on, and shall have maximum res judicata, collateral estoppel, and all other\n\n\n\n 11\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 12 of 13 PageID 632\n\n\n\npreclusive effect in, all pending and future lawsuits, claims, suits, demands, petitions, causes of\n\naction, or other proceedings as to Released Claims and other prohibitions set forth in this Final\n\nApproval Order and Judgment that are maintained by, or on behalf of, any Settlement Class Member\n\nor any other person subject to the provisions of this Final Approval Order and Judgment.\n\n 29. If the Effective Date, as defined in the Settlement Agreement, does not occur\n\nfor any reason, this Final Approval Order and Judgment and the Preliminary Approval Order shall\n\nbe deemed vacated, and shall have no force and effect whatsoever; the Settlement Agreement shall\n\nbe considered null and void; all of the Parties\u2019 obligations under the Settlement Agreement, the\n\nPreliminary Approval Order, and this Final Approval Order and Judgment and the terms and\n\nprovisions of the Settlement Agreement shall have no further force and effect with respect to the\n\nParties and shall not be used in the Action or in any other proceeding for any purpose, and any\n\njudgment or order entered by the Court in accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement\n\nshall be treated as vacated nunc pro tunc, and the Parties shall be restored to their respective positions\n\nin the Action, as if the Parties never entered into the Settlement Agreement (without prejudice to\n\nany of the Parties\u2019 respective positions on the issue of class certification or any other issue). In such\n\nevent, the Parties will jointly request that all scheduled deadlines be reasonably extended by the\n\nCourt so as to avoid prejudice to any Party or Party\u2019s counsel. Further, in such event, Pinnacle will\n\nprovide compensation to the Settlement Administrator for any amounts already incurred by the\n\nSettlement Administrator for costs of notice to the Settlement Class and Settlement administration,\n\nand will not, at any time, seek recovery of same from any other Party to the Action or from counsel\n\nto any other Party to the Litigation.\n\n 30. Pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1651, this Court shall retain the authority\n\n\n\n 12\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 34 Filed 12/20/24 Page 13 of 13 PageID 633\n\n\n\nto issue any order necessary to protect its jurisdiction from any action, whether in state or federal\n\ncourt.\n\n 31. Without affecting the finality of this Final Approval Order and Judgment, the Court\n\nwill retain jurisdiction over the subject matter and the Parties with respect to the interpretation and\n\nimplementation of the Settlement Agreement for all purposes.\n\n 32. This Order resolves all claims against all Parties in this action and is a final order.\n\n 33. Per the terms of the Parties\u2019 Settlement Agreement, this Action is DISMISSED\n\nWITH PREJUDICE.\n\n 34. A separate final order and judgment shall follow.\n\n SO ORDERED.\n\n SIGNED: December 20, 2024.\n\n\n\n JANE J. BOYLE\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE\n\n\n\n\n 13\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2025-12-24T07:31:08.177736-08:00","document_number":"34","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177017349198","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-20T15:20:14.456761-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-20T15:20:14.458799-08:00","date_filed":"2024-12-20","time_filed":"16:27:05","entry_number":34,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-12-20.001","pacer_sequence_number":90,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/411754093/","id":411754093,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/424920237/","id":424920237,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/35/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-20T15:20:14.407737-08:00","date_modified":"2026-03-12T07:39:04.720756-07:00","sha1":"db43c493530b310df82d472709093c4a0f6d2e08","page_count":1,"file_size":57703,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.35.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.35.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 35 Filed 12/20/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID 634\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nAMANDA FITTON, on behalf of herself and\nall others similarly situated, Case No. 3:23-cv-1559\n\n Plaintiff,\n\nv.\n\nPINNACLE PROPANE, LLC,\n\n Defendant.\n\n\n\n FINAL JUDGMENT\n The Court has entered an order granting Plaintiffs\u2019 Motion for Final Approval of Class Action\nSettlement and granting Plaintiffs\u2019 Motion for Attorneys\u2019 Fees, Costs, and Expenses to Settlement Class\nCounsel, and Service Award Payment to Plaintiff. See Doc. 34. In the event there is a dispute concerning\nthe enforcement of the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Parties shall confer in good faith to resolve\nany such dispute and if such dispute remains unresolved, the dispute shall be heard by this Court, which\nshall retain jurisdiction for said purpose.\n\n Therefore, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Court DISMISSES this\naction with prejudice.\n\n SO ORDERED.\n\n SIGNED: December 20, 2024.\n\n\n\n JANE J. BOYLE\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2026-03-11T18:42:32.598460-07:00","document_number":"35","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177017349250","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Judgment","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-20T15:20:14.395769-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-20T15:20:14.398516-08:00","date_filed":"2024-12-20","time_filed":"16:30:06","entry_number":35,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-12-20.001","pacer_sequence_number":92,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115638/","id":410115638,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747593/","id":422747593,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/30/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.071796-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.081386-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"30","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.056980-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.061745-08:00","date_filed":"2024-11-19","time_filed":null,"entry_number":30,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-11-19.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"ELECTRONIC SCHEDULING ORDER: Due to a Court scheduling conflict, the Final Approval Hearing is reset to 12/19/2024 at 10:00 AM before Judge Jane J Boyle at 1100 Commerce St, Dallas, TX 75242. (Ordered by Judge Jane J Boyle on 11/19/2024) (chmb) (Entered: 11/19/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115637/","id":410115637,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747592/","id":422747592,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/29/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.036925-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-18T15:59:32.643331-08:00","sha1":"cb7be3e63de8b06057a7645d4a64c2a51c1e0751","page_count":4,"file_size":488714,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.29.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.29.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29 Filed 11/04/24 Page 1 of 4 PageID 528\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nAMANDA FITTON, on behalf of herself and\nall others similarly situated, Case No. 3:23-cv-1559\n\n Plaintiff, PLAINTIFF\u2019S UNOPPOSED\n MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL\nv. OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT\n\nPINNACLE PROPANE, LLC,\n\n Defendant.\n\n\n PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the accompanying Memorandum of Law in Support\n\nof Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and all prior pleadings and\n\nproceedings had herein, Plaintiff Amanda Fitton, individually and on behalf of the putative class,\n\n(\u201cPlaintiff\u201d) moves for an Order awarding final approval of this proposed class action settlement\n\nand respectfully requests that this Court:\n\n 1. Grant final certification of the Settlement Class for settlement purposes, appoint\n\nPlaintiff Amanda Fitton as Class Representative, and appoint Raina C. Borrelli of Strauss Borrelli\n\nPLLC as Class Counsel;\n\n 2. Approve the requested attorney\u2019s fees of $163,333.33, costs of $18,668.33, and\n\nPlaintiff\u2019s requested service award in the amount of $5,000;\n\n 3. Find that the Notice met the requirements of due process and Federal Rule of Civil\n\nProcedure 23;\n\n 4. Find that the terms of the Settlement Agreement fair, reasonable, and adequate and\n\napproved, adopted, and incorporated by the Court;\n\n\n\n\n 1\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29 Filed 11/04/24 Page 2 of 4 PageID 529\n\n\n\n 5. Direct the Parties, their respective attorneys, and the Claims Administrator to\n\nconsummate the Settlement in accordance with the Court Order and the terms of the Settlement\n\nAgreement, and;\n\n 6. Resolve all claims against all parties in this Action and issue the Proposed Final\n\nApproval Order.\n\n This Motion is based on the accompanying Supporting Memorandum; the Declaration of\n\nRaina C. Borrelli in Support of Preliminary Approval (Doc. 20-2); the Declaration of Raina C.\n\nBorrelli in Support of Plaintiff\u2019s Motion to Approve Attorneys\u2019 Fees, Costs, and Service Award\n\n(Doc. 28-2); the Settlement Agreement (Doc. 20-1 and 24); Plaintiff\u2019s Motion for Preliminary\n\nApproval of Class Action Settlement, Supporting Memorandum, Supporting Declarations, and\n\nattachments (Docs 19-20); and Plaintiff\u2019s Motion to Approve Attorney\u2019s Fees, Costs, and Service\n\nAward and accompanying documents at (Doc. 28); and all other pleadings and papers on file in\n\nthis action and any oral argument that may be heard by this Court at or prior to the Final Approval\n\nHearing currently scheduled for December 3, 2024. Defendant does not oppose the relief sought\n\nin this motion.\n\n\n WHEREFORE, for the reasons above, Plaintiff requests that the Court grant her Motion to\n\nfor Final Approval of Class Action Settlement\n\n\n\nDated: November 4, 2024 Respectfully submitted,\n\n\n By: /s/ Raina C. Borrelli\n Raina C. Borrelli (pro hac vice)\n STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC\n One Magnificent Mile\n 980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610\n Chicago, IL, 60611\n Telephone: (872) 263-1100\n\n\n\n 2\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29 Filed 11/04/24 Page 3 of 4 PageID 530\n\n\n\n Facsimile: (872) 263-1109\n raina@straussborrelli.com\n\n Joe Kendall\n KENDALL LAW GROUP PLLC\n 3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 1450\n Dallas, TX 75219\n Telephone: (214) 744-3000\n Facsimile: (214) 744-3015\n jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com\n\n Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class\n\n\n\n\n 3\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29 Filed 11/04/24 Page 4 of 4 PageID 531\n\n\n\n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n I, Raina C. Borrelli, hereby certify that on November 4, 2024, I electronically filed the\n\nforegoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of\n\nsuch filing to counsel of record, below, via the ECF system.\n\n\n\nDATED this 4th day of November, 2024.\n\n STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC\n\n By: /s/ Raina C. Borrelli\n Raina C. Borrelli\n STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC\n One Magnificent Mile\n 980 N Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610\n Chicago IL, 60611\n Telephone: (872) 263-1100\n Facsimile: (872) 263-1109\n raina@straussborrelli.com\n\n\n\n\n 4\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2024-12-04T18:10:54.412670-08:00","document_number":"29","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177017244094","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747596/","id":422747596,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/29/1/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:45.915842-08:00","date_modified":"2026-03-12T09:49:58.445477-07:00","sha1":"6175c1c6282e7be9f700ddcc6ead0d8e37fba8fc","page_count":31,"file_size":681812,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.29.1.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.29.1.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 1 of 31 PageID 532\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nAMANDA FITTON, on behalf of herself and\nall others similarly situated, Case No. 3:23cv1559\n\n Plaintiff,\n\nv.\n\nPINNACLE PROPANE, LLC,\n\n Defendant.\n\n\n\n PLAINTIFF\u2019S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR\n FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 2 of 31 PageID 533\n\n\n\n TABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nI. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1\n\nII. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ........................................................... 2\n\nIII. SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT ........................................................................................... 4\n\n A. The Settlement Class........................................................................................................... 4\n\n B. Settlement Benefits ............................................................................................................. 4\n\n C. Notice, Fees, Costs, and Service Awards ........................................................................... 6\n\n\nIV. LEGAL STANDARD............................................................................................................. 7\n\nV. ARGUMENT .......................................................................................................................... 9\n\n A. The Settlement is Fair, Reasonable, and Adequate............................................................. 9\n\n 1. Plaintiff and Settlement Class Counsel Provided Excellent Representation. ............... 10\n\n 2. The Settlement is the product of serious, informed, arm\u2019s-length negotiations. .......... 11\n\n 3. The Settlement is Favorable Given the Complexity, Expense, and Likely Duration of the\n\n Litigation. .............................................................................................................................. 12\n\n 4. The State of Litigation and the Available Discovery.................................................... 12\n\n 5. The Settlement Terms Appropriately Balance the Merits of Plaintiff\u2019s Claims and the\n\n Likelihood of Success with the Attendant Risks. ................................................................. 13\n\n 6. Class Counsel and Plaintiff Believe the Settlement is in the Settlement Class\u2019s Best\n\n Interest................................................................................................................................... 16\n\n 7. The Effectiveness of the Proposed Method of Distributing Relief to the Class Supports\n\n Final Approval. ..................................................................................................................... 16\n\n\n\n i\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 3 of 31 PageID 534\n\n\n\n 8. The Settlement Treats Class Members Equitably Relative to Each Other. .................. 17\n\n 9. Reaction of Settlement Class Members. ....................................................................... 17\n\n B. The Court Should Finally Certify the Settlement Class.................................................... 17\n\n C. The Settlement Administrator Provided Notice Pursuant to the Court\u2019s Preliminary\n\n Approval Order and Satisfied Rule 23 and Due Process. ......................................................... 20\n\n\nVI. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................... 22\n\n\n\n\n ii\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 4 of 31 PageID 535\n\n\n TABLE OF AUTHORITIES\n\nCases\n\nAssoc. for Disabled Am., Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co.,\n 211 F.R.D. 457 (S.D. Fla. 2002) ............................................................................................... 12\n\nAyers v. Thompson,\n 358 F.3d 356 (5th Cir. 2004) ............................................................................................... 12, 13\n\nBaksh v. IvyRehab Network, Inc.,\n No. 7:20-cv-01845 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 27, 2021) ............................................................................ 14\n\nBillittri v. Securities America, Inc.,\n Nos. 3:09-cv-01568-F, 3:10-cv-01833-F, 2011 WL 3586217 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 4, 2011) ......... 21\n\nBurford v. Cargill, Inc.,\n No. 05-0283, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161292 (W.D. La. Nov. 8, 2012) .................................... 9\n\nCorra v. ACTS Ret. Servs.,\n No. 22-2917, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 500 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 2, 2024)............................................ 14\n\nCotton v. Hinton,\n 559 F.2d 1326 (5th Cir. 1977) ......................................................................................... 9, 12, 16\n\nDeHoyos v. Allstate Corp.,\n 240 F.R.D (W.D. Tex. Feb. 21, 2007) ........................................................................... 13, 14, 16\n\nElna Sefcovic, LLC v. TEP Rocky Mountain, LLC,\n 807 F. App'x 752 (10th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. Gonzalez v. Elna Sefcovic, LLC, 141 S. Ct.\n 851 (2020) ................................................................................................................................. 21\n\nFeder v. Elec. Data Sys. Corp.,\n 429 F.3d 125, 130 (5th Cir. 2005) ............................................................................................. 19\n\nGrimm v. American Eagle Airlines, Inc.,\n No. LA CV 11-00406 JAK(MANx), 2014 WL 1274376 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2014)............... 15\n\nHapka v. Carecentrix, Inc.,\n Case No. 2:16-cv-02372-KGG (D. Kan. Feb. 15, 2018) ........................................................... 20\n\nIn re Corrugated Container Antitrust Litig.,\n 659 F.2d 1322 (5th Cir. 1981) ................................................................................................... 14\n\nIn re Deepwater Horizon,\n 739 F.3d 790, 810\u201311 (5th Cir. 2014) ....................................................................................... 18\n\nIn re Hannaford Bros. Co. Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig.,\n 293 F.R.D. 21 (D. Me. 2013)..................................................................................................... 15\n\n iii\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 5 of 31 PageID 536\n\n\n\nIn re Heartland Payment Sys., Inc. Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig.,\n 851 F. Supp. 2d (S.D. Tex. 2012) .................................................................................. 10, 11, 12\n\nJenkins v. Raymark Industries, Inc.,\n 782 F.2d 468, 472 (5th Cir. 1986) ............................................................................................. 19\n\nKlein v. O'Neal, Inc.,\n 705 F. Supp. 2d 632 (N.D. Tex. 2010) ........................................................................ 8, 9, 12, 16\n\nLinnins v. HAECO Ams., Inc.,\n No. 16-cv-486, 2018 WL 5312193 (M.D.N.C. Oct. 26, 2018) ................................................. 15\n\nManchaca v. Chater,\n 927 F. Supp. 962 (E.D. Tex. 1996) ........................................................................................... 10\n\nMowery v. Saint Francis Healthcare Sys.,\n No. 1:20-cv-00013-SPC (E.D. Mo. Dec. 22, 2020) .................................................................. 14\n\nMullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.,\n 339 U.S. 306 (1950) .................................................................................................................. 20\n\nMullen v. Treasure Chest Casino, LLC,\n 186 F.3d 620, 624 (5th Cir. 1999) ............................................................................................. 18\n\nNelson v. Constant,\n 2020 WL 5258454 .................................................................................................................... 18\n\nODonnell v. Harris Cnty., Texas,\n No. CV H-16-1414, 22019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151159 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 5, 2019) ....................... 8\n\nOrtiz v. Fibreboard Corp.,\n 527 U.S. 815 (1999) .................................................................................................................. 11\n\nParker v. Anderson,\n 667 F.2d 1204 (5th Cir. 1982) ................................................................................................... 13\n\nPettway v. Am. Cast Iron Pipe Co.,\n 576 F.2d 1157 (5th Cir. 1978) ............................................................................................... 9, 16\n\nPhillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts,\n 472 U.S. 797 (1985) .................................................................................................................. 20\n\nPurdie v. Ace Cash Express, Inc.,\n No. 301CV1754L, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22547 (N.D. Tex. Dec. 11, 2003) ........................... 8\n\nQuintanilla v. A & R Demolition Inc.,\n 2007 WL 5166849 (S.D. Tex. May 7, 2007)............................................................................. 11\n\n\n\n iv\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 6 of 31 PageID 537\n\n\n\nReed v. General Motors Corp.,\n 703 F.2d 170 (5th Cir. 1983) ................................................................................. 8, 9, 12, 13, 14\n\nSan Antonio Hispanic Police Officers\u2019 Org., Inc. v. City of San Antonio,\n 188 F.R.D. 433 (W.D. Tex. 1999) ............................................................................................. 13\n\nStirman v. Exxon Corp.,\n 280 F.3d 554, 562 (5th Cir. 2002) ............................................................................................. 19\n\nStott v. Capital Financial Services,\n 277 F.R.D. 316 (N.D. Tex. 2011) ........................................................................................ 16, 21\n\nUnion Asset Mgmt. Holding A.G. v. Dell, Inc.,\n 669 F.3d 632 (5th Cir. 2012) ....................................................................................................... 8\n\nWal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes,\n 564 U.S. 338, 347 (2011) .......................................................................................................... 18\n\n\n\n\n v\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 7 of 31 PageID 538\n\n\n\n\n Plaintiff Amanda Fitton, by and through the undersigned Settlement Class Counsel 1,\n\nsubmits this Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Settlement and Memorandum in\n\nSupport, requesting final approval of this proposed class action settlement (\u201cSettlement\u201d) pursuant\n\nto Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e) on the terms set forth in the Settlement Agreement (Doc. 20-1, or \u201cS.A.\u201d) 2\n\nand for final certification of the Settlement Class. 3\n\nI. INTRODUCTION\n\n If approved, the Settlement will successfully resolve the claims of approximately 10,000\n\nindividuals nationwide whose personal identifying information (\u201cPII\u201d) was allegedly accessed, as\n\nthe result of a cyberattack, by an unauthorized third party to certain computer systems of Defendant\n\nPinnacle Propane, LLC (\u201cPinnacle\u201d) between November 28, 2022, and December 6, 2022. The\n\nSettlement negotiated on behalf of Plaintiff and the Class provided significant benefits to the\n\nSettlement Class through a $490,000 non-reversionary common fund. Under the Settlement,\n\nSettlement Class Members are eligible to recover compensation for up to $2,000 in out-of-pocket\n\nexpenses, up to $40 per hour for up to six hours of lost time (up to $240 total), three years of credit\n\nmonitoring protection, or alternatively, a $100 cash payment in lieu of all other aforementioned\n\ncompensation and credit monitoring. Additionally, Pinnacle will undertake commitments to\n\nimplement or maintain additional data security measures at its own expense (i.e. separate from the\n\nSettlement Fund) and separate from the other settlement benefits for the Settlement Class. The\n\nsettlement fund also covers all costs of class notice and settlement administration, attorneys\u2019 fees\n\nand costs, and a Class Representative service award. This Settlement represents an excellent result\n\n\n\n1\n The Court preliminarily appointed Plaintiff Amanda Fitton as the Settlement Class Representative and appointed\nRaina Borrelli of Strauss Borrelli PLLC (formerly Turke & Strauss LLP) as Settlement Class Counsel. Doc. 26.\n2\n As modified by the First Stipulation to Amend the Settlement Agreement, Doc. 24.\n3\n Unless otherwise defined, all capitalized terms have the meanings set forth in the Settlement Agreement .\n\n 1\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 8 of 31 PageID 539\n\n\n\nfor the Settlement Class and provides them with meaningful benefits to remedy the harm they have\n\nallegedly suffered, or will suffer, due to the Incident.\n\n On June 26, 2024, this Court granted preliminary approval to the Settlement, finding that\n\nit is \u201cfair, reasonable, and adequate,\u201d and ordered that notice to the Settlement Class Commence.\n\nDoc. 26, \u00b63. The Court-ordered notice plan has since been successfully executed and the response\n\nto the Settlement has been overwhelmingly favorable, with no opt outs and no objections.\n\nDeclaration of Settlement Administrator Regarding Notie (\u201cAnalytics Decl.\u201d), \u00b613. This response\n\nweighs in favor of final approval. For the reasons detailed below, Plaintiff and Settlement Class\n\nCounsel respectfully submit that the Settlement meets the standards for final approval under Rule\n\n23, and is a fair, reasonable, and adequate result for the Settlement Class. Plaintiff respectfully\n\nrequests the Court to finally approve the Settlement, approve the requested attorneys\u2019 fees, costs,\n\nand service award,4 and enter a final judgment dismissing this case.\n\nII. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND\n\n Pinnacle is a propane supplier based in Irving, Texas and claims to be the largest global\n\n liquefied petroleum gas distributor. Doc. 1 (\u201cCompl.\u201d), \u00b6\u00b6 2, 18. Plaintiff alleges that Pinnacle\n\n collects PII an from its employees, including names and Social security numbers and, in doing\n\n so, agreed it would safeguard the data in accordance with its internal policies, state law, and\n\n federal law. Id. \u00b6\u00b6 3, 4, 7. However, on December 4, 2022, Pinnacle discovered that an\n\n unauthorized third party had accessed its computer network between November 28, 2022, and\n\n December 6, 2022. Id. \u00b6\u00b6 4, 23. Plaintiff alleges that her information was impacted in the Data\n\n Incident. In July 2023, Ms. Fitton sued Pinnacle to remediate the alleged harm the incident may\n\n\n\n\n4\n See Motion filed at Doc. 28.\n\n 2\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 9 of 31 PageID 540\n\n\n\n have caused her and the class, asserting six counts and demanding that Pinnacle reimburse the\n\n class\u2019s losses. Id. Prayer for Relief.\n\n On September 7, 2023, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss, generally denying each and\n\n every cause of action asserted by Plaintiff in her Complaint. Doc. 11. Shortly after Defendant\n\n filed its Motion to Dismiss, the Parties agreed to explore mediation. No formal discovery was\n\n conducted. Instead, the Parties engaged early in Federal Rule of Evidence 408 communications\n\n and discovery. Doc. 28-2, \u00b6 8.\n\n Shortly thereafter, the parties agreed to mediate this case with Hon. Jay C. Ghandhi (Ret.),\n\n a mediator experienced in settling data security cases. Id. \u00b6 9. After a lengthy mediation,\n\n conducted at arms-length with Judge Ghandhi\u2019s assistance, the parties were able to reach a\n\n settlement. Id. \u00b6 10. From the start, the parties agreed they would not negotiate the proposed\n\n class\u2019s attorney fees or plaintiff\u2019s service award until they agreed on the settlement agreement\u2019s\n\n core terms, thus avoiding conflict between plaintiff and the class. Id.\n\n On June 18, 2024, the parties attended the preliminary approval hearing in Dallas, Texas\n\nwhere the Court requested that the parties address certain items related to the Settlement and\n\nrequested that Plaintiff file a supplemental declaration containing detailed time records in support\n\nof the attorney\u2019s fees contemplated by the proposed Settlement. Docs. 23, 24. A stipulation to\n\namend the Settlement Agreement and a supplemental declaration in support of Plaintiff\u2019s\n\nunopposed motion for preliminary approval was subsequently filed by Plaintiff on June 21, 2024.\n\nDoc. 24.\n\n On June 26, 2024, the Court granted preliminary approval to the Settlement. Doc. 26. Since\n\n this Court granted entered the Preliminary Approval Order, the Parties, in conjunction with the\n\n\n\n\n 3\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 10 of 31 PageID 541\n\n\n\n Settlement Administrator, Analytics, have effectuated Notice consistent with the Settlement and\n\n Preliminary Approval Order. See generally Analytics Decl.\n\n III. SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT\n\n A. The Settlement Class\n\n The Settlement provides for the certification of the Settlement Class defined as \u201c[a]ll\n\n individuals whose Private Information was compromised or potentially compromised in the Data\n\n Incident disclosed by Pinnacle in June 2023.\u201d S.A. \u00b6 56.\n\n Private Information includes, but is not limited to, names, addresses, Social Security\n\n numbers, additional personally identifiable information, and any other types of personally\n\n identifiable information that Defendant may have collected and maintained. S.A. \u00b6 46. All\n\n members of the Settlement Class that do not opt-out of the settlement shall be referred to as\n\n Settlement Class Members.\n\n B. Settlement Benefits\n\n The Settlement establishes a $490,000 non-reversionary common fund (the \u201cSettlement\n\n Fund\u201d) from which Pinnacle will provide Settlement Class Members with timely benefits targeted\n\n at remediating the specific harms they claim to have suffered as a result of the Incident. The\n\n benefits of the Settlement are available to all Settlement Class Members. The Settlement provides\n\n the following benefits to all Settlement Class Members who submit a valid claim:\n\n First, Settlement Class Members are eligible to receive compensation for up to $2,000\n\n through submission of a valid and timely claim and supporting documentation for their out-of-\n\n pocket losses, including documented Unreimbursed Economic Losses, lost time, and documented\n\n fees for credit reports, credit monitoring, or other identity theft insurance products that were\n\n incurred as a result of the Data Incident. S.A. \u00b6 70. Documented ordinary out-of-pocket expenses\n\n\n\n 4\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 11 of 31 PageID 542\n\n\n\n include unreimbursed bank fees, long distance phone charges, cell phone charges (only if charged\n\n by the minute), data charges (only if charged based on the amount of data used), postage, or\n\n gasoline for local travel. S.A. \u00b6 70(ii). The expenses must have been incurred between December\n\n 4, 2022, and the Claims Deadline, which is 90 days after notice is sent. S.A. \u00b6\u00b6 70(ii),74.\n\n Documents fees for credit reports, credit monitoring, or other identify theft insurance products\n\n purchased between December 4, 2022, and the Claims Deadline are also recoverable, subject to\n\n the $2,000 cap. S.A. \u00b6 70(ii).\n\n Second, , the Settlement also allows Settlement Class Members who have spent at least\n\n one full hour dealing with the Data Incident to claim up to six hours of lost time at $40 per hour,\n\n for a maximum of $240.00, by submitting a claim attesting to the number of hours spent responding\n\n to issues raised by the Data Incident and checking a box describing how the claimed lost time was\n\n spent. S.A. \u00b6 70(iii). Claims for lost time may be combined with claims for documented out-of-\n\n pocket expenses and documented fees for credit reports, credit monitoring, or other identity theft\n\n insurance products and are subject to the same $2,000 cap. Id.\n\n Third, Settlement Class Members, including those previously enrolled in the credit\n\n monitoring offered by Defendant at the time it provided notice of the Data Incident, shall have the\n\n ability to make a claim for three years of credit monitoring in three (3) years of one-bureau Credit\n\n Monitoring Services, which will include identity restoration services and $1 million in identity\n\n theft insurance, provided by Experian, or any other comparable provider. S.A. \u00b6 70(i). This\n\n Settlement benefit bears with it significant value, and Pinnacle will pay for this benefit separate\n\n and apart from the other benefits offered by the Settlement. Id.\n\n Fourth, in lieu of the Settlement Benefits for the aforementioned Out-Pocket-Costs Losses,\n\n Lost Time, and Credit monitoring, Settlement Class Members can elect to make a claim for a $100\n\n\n\n 5\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 12 of 31 PageID 543\n\n\n\n Alternative Cash Payment. S.A. \u00b6 70(iv). Submission for the $100 Alternative Cash Payment can\n\n be made on or before the Claims Deadline and, significantly, requires no additional documentation.\n\n Fifth, Separate from and in addition to the other Settlement Benefits described above,\n\n Pinnacle agrees to implement or maintain additional data security measures and improvements.\n\n S.A. \u00b6 71.\n\n C. Notice, Fees, Costs, and Service Awards\n\n The parties did not discuss or agree upon payment of attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and expenses\n\n or Plaintiff\u2019s service award until after they agreed on all material terms of relief to the Settlement\n\n Class. Doc. 28-2, \u00b6 10. Pinnacle will pay the costs of notice to the Settlement Class, costs of Claims\n\n Administration, and the costs of dispute resolution through the Settlement Fund. S.A. \u00b6 95.\n\n Pinnacle will also pay for Plaintiff\u2019s attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and expenses, and service award to\n\n Plaintiff through the Settlement Fund, as approved by the Court. S.A. \u00b6\u00b6 125, 129. Plaintiffs filed\n\n a motion seeking attorneys\u2019 fees of $163,333.33, litigation expenses of $18,668.33, and a service\n\n award to Plaintiff of $5,000, subject to Court approval. Doc. 28.\n\n On July 3, 2024, Analytics received Settlement Class Member data from Defendant that\n\n included files containing 10,011 records of names and addresses of Settlement Class Members.\n\n Analytics Decl., \u00b6 5. Of these, 37 were identified as duplicate records and three (3) records had\n\n no mailing address listed, and thus were removed from the notice list. Id. Analytics then sent\n\n postcard notice to a total of 9,971 unique Settlement Class Members (after updating addresses\n\n using the United States Postal Service National Change of Address database). Id. \u00b6 7. Of those\n\n notices, very few were undeliverable, with 94.5% of the Settlement Class successfully receiving\n\n direct notice. Id. \u00b6 12.\n\n\n\n\n 6\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 13 of 31 PageID 544\n\n\n\n Additionally, Analytics established the Settlement Website,\n\n www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com, where Settlement Class Members could obtain\n\n copies of the Settlement Agreement and Release, Long Form Notice, Postcard Notice, Claim\n\n Form, and the Court\u2019s Preliminary Approval Order. Id. \u00b6 8. The Settlement Website also permitted\n\n Settlement Class Members to submit a claim form. Id. Analytics also established a toll-free phone\n\n number of (1-877-410-5068) and a dedicated email box\n\n (PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement@noticeadministrator.com) to receive and respond to\n\n Settlement Class Member inquiries. Id. \u00b6 9. The phone number and email address were included\n\n in the Class Notice. Id.\n\n In response to the Notice, no Settlement Class Members have opted out and there have\n\n been no objections to-date (the deadline to do so is November 13, 2024). Id. \u00b6 13. The deadline\n\n for the submission of claims is December 13, 2024, and Analytics has already received a number\n\n of claims that they continue to review for validity. Id. \u00b6 15. Additionally, on November 4, 2024,\n\n Analytics sent a reminder postcard notice to all Settlement Class Members who had not yet\n\n submitted a claim form. Id. \u00b6 12.\n\n IV. LEGAL STANDARD\n\n Plaintiff brings this motion pursuant to Federal Rule Civil Procedure 23(e), under which a\n\n class action may not be settled without approval of the Court. The general standard for final\n\n approval of a proposed settlement of a class action under Rule 23(e)(2) remains whether it is \u201cfair,\n\n reasonable and adequate.\u201d To make that determination, Rule 23(e)(2) provides that a court should\n\n consider whether:\n\n (A) the class representatives and class counsel have adequately represented the\n class; (B) the proposal was negotiated at arm\u2019s length; (C) the relief provided for\n the class is adequate, taking into account: (i) the costs, risks, and delay of trial and\n appeal; (ii) the effectiveness of any proposed method of distributing relief to the\n\n 7\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 14 of 31 PageID 545\n\n\n\n class, including the method of processing class-member claims; (iii) the terms of\n any proposed award of attorney\u2019s fees, including timing of payment; and (iv) any\n agreement required to be identified under Rule 23(e)(3); and (D) the proposal treats\n class members equitably relative to each other.\n\n\n Rule 23(e)(2).5 These factors are consistent with the common-law criteria that preceded Rule 23.\n\n See Reed v. General Motors Corp., 703 F.2d 170, 172 (5th Cir. 1983) (laying out six factors for\n\n courts to consider in determining the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of a proposed class\n\n settlement: (1) the existence of fraud or collusion behind the settlement; (2) the complexity,\n\n expense, and likely duration of the litigation; (3) the stage of the proceedings and the amount of\n\n discovery completed; (4) the probability of the plaintiffs\u2019 success on the merits; (5) the range of\n\n possible recovery; and (6) the opinions of the class counsel, class representatives, and absent class\n\n members); see also Union Asset Mgmt. Holding A.G. v. Dell, Inc., 669 F.3d 632, 639 n.11 (5th\n\n Cir. 2012) (quoting Reed, 703 F.2d at 172).\n\n \u201cBecause the Rule 23 and case-law factors overlap, courts in this circuit often combine\n\n them in analyzing class settlements.\u201d ODonnell v. Harris Cnty., Texas, No. CV H-16-1414, 22019\n\n U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151159, at *26 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 5, 2019). \u201cWhen considering [Rule 23(e)(2)]\n\n factors, the court should keep in mind the strong presumption in favor of finding a settlement fair.\u201d\n\n Purdie v. Ace Cash Express, Inc., No. 301CV1754L, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22547, at *16 (N.D.\n\n Tex. Dec. 11, 2003); see also Klein v. O'Neal, Inc., 705 F. Supp. 2d 632, 650 (N.D. Tex. 2010)\n\n (There is a \u201cstrong presumption that an arms-length class action settlement is fair\u2014especially\n\n when doing so will result in significant economies of judicial resources\u201d).\n\n A \u201cproposed settlement need not obtain the largest conceivable recovery for the class to be\n\n worthy of approval; it must simply be fair and adequate considering all the relevant\n\n\n 5\n Here, there are no agreements between the Parties except those set forth in, or explicitly referenced in, the Settlement\n Agreement. Thus Rule 23(e)(2)(C)(iv) is irrelevant here.\n\n 8\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 15 of 31 PageID 546\n\n\n\n circumstances.\u201d Klein, 705 F. Supp. 2d at 649. Indeed, because \u201ccompromise is the essence of a\n\n settlement\u2026the settlement need not accord the plaintiff class every benefit that might have been\n\n gained after full trial.\u201d Pettway v. Am. Cast Iron Pipe Co., 576 F.2d 1157, 1214 (5th Cir. 1978);\n\n see also Cotton v. Hinton, 559 F.2d 1326 (5th Cir. 1977) (\u201cThe trial court should not make a\n\n proponent of a proposed settlement justify each term of settlement against a hypothetical or\n\n speculative measure of what concessions might have been gained; inherent in compromise is a\n\n yielding of absolutes and an abandoning of highest hopes.\u201d). Accordingly, \u201cabsent fraud, collusion,\n\n or the like, [courts] should be hesitant to substitute [their] own judgment for that of counsel.\u201d Klein,\n\n 705 F. Supp. 2d at 649.\n\n V. ARGUMENT\n\n A. The Settlement is Fair, Reasonable, and Adequate\n\n Under both the Rule 23(e) factors and the Fifth Circuit\u2019s Reed factors, the Court should\n\n grant Plaintiff\u2019s motion seeking final approval of this Settlement, which offers significant and\n\n immediate relief to the nearly 10,000 individuals affected by Pinnacle\u2019s Data Incident. As the\n\n Court held when it granted preliminary approval, the Settlement is \u201cfair, reasonable, and\n\n adequate,\u201d and was negotiated at arms-length. Doc. 26 at pg. 2; id. \u00b6 3. Nothing has changed since\n\n preliminary approval that should alter this assessment. In fact, the response of the Settlement Class\n\n to the Settlement (no requests for exclusion and no objections out of a class of nearly 10,000 people\n\n who were sent notice by first-class mail) further underscores that the Settlement is, in fact, fair,\n\n reasonable, and adequate. See Burford v. Cargill, Inc., No. 05-0283, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS\n\n 161292, at *17 (W.D. La. Nov. 8, 2012) (approving a class settlement because \u201cnot a single class\n\n member objected to the settlement\u201d and that \u201cthe existence of 2 opt-outs established that \u201cthe\n\n settlement process worked\u201d while also showing there was not \u201cdissatisfaction with the\n\n\n\n 9\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 16 of 31 PageID 547\n\n\n\n settlement.\u201d). For these reasons, and for the additional reasons Class Counsel will show the Court\n\n below, the Court should finally approve the Settlement.\n\n 1. Plaintiff and Settlement Class Counsel Provided Excellent Representation.\n\n Plaintiff and Class Counsel certainly satisfy the adequacy of representation factor under\n\n Rule 23(e)(2)(A). Plaintiff has no conflicts of interest with other Settlement Class Members, is not\n\n subject to any unique defenses, and she and her counsel vigorously prosecuted and continue to\n\n vigorously prosecute this case on behalf of the Class. See generally Doc. 28-2 (\u201cBorrelli Fee\n\n Decl.\u201d). Further, Class Counsel are experienced in the successful litigation and settlement of class\n\n action litigation, including data privacy cases. See id. \u00b6\u00b6 37-45; In re Heartland Payment Sys., Inc.\n\n Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig., 851 F. Supp. 2d at 1055 (S.D. Tex. 2012) (adequacy satisfied\n\n where class counsel had \u201cextensive experience representing consumers, and other plaintiff classes,\n\n in class-action litigation,\u201d including \u201cexperience representing consumer classes in similar data-\n\n breach cases\u201d).\n\n Class Counsel also conducted a thorough investigation of the facts both before and during\n\n the course of this action, including prior to engaging in mediation and negotiating the Settlement.\n\n This investigation allowed Class Counsel to have a \u201cfull understanding of the legal and factual\n\n issues surrounding this case\u201d prior to reaching the Settlement. Manchaca v. Chater, 927 F. Supp.\n\n 962, 967 (E.D. Tex. 1996). Having completed their investigation and given the risks of no recovery\n\n at all, Settlement Class Counsel, together with Plaintiff, settled this matter in a way that not only\n\n provides timely and important benefits to the Settlement Class, but also avoids the expense and\n\n risk of ongoing litigation.\n\n\n\n\n 10\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 17 of 31 PageID 548\n\n\n\n 2. The Settlement is the product of serious, informed, arm\u2019s-length\n negotiations.\n\n This Settlement is the result of a thorough investigation and arm\u2019s-length negotiations\n\n between attorneys experienced in consumer class actions and claims regarding data breaches. See\n\n Ortiz v. Fibreboard Corp., 527 U.S. 815, 852 (1999) (\u201c[O]ne may take a settlement amount as\n\n good evidence of the maximum available if one can assume that parties of equal knowledge and\n\n negotiating skill agreed upon the figure through arms-length bargaining.\u201d). The Parties engaged a\n\n well-respected and experienced mediator, Judge Jay Gandhi (Ret.) of JAMS, to assist them in\n\n resolving this case via mediation. Borrelli Fee Decl., \u00b6 9 In the weeks leading up to the mediation,\n\n the parties exchanged key information needed to inform their strategies. Id. \u00b6\u00b6 8-9. Throughout all\n\n negotiations, Settlement Class Counsel and counsel for Pinnacle fought hard for the interests of\n\n their respective clients. Id. \u00b6 11.\n\n This exchange of information prior to settlement discussions and the involvement of a\n\n third-party mediator all weigh in favor of final approval as they demonstrate that negotiations were\n\n all at arms-length and supported by all relevant factual information needed. See In re Heartland\n\n Payment Sys., 851 F. Supp. 2d at 1064 (approving settlement because \u201c[t]he parties have shown\n\n that they possessed sufficient information to gauge the strengths and weaknesses of the claims and\n\n defenses\u201d despite the fact that only informal discovery was taken and the case settled at an early\n\n stage); see also Quintanilla v. A & R Demolition Inc., 2007 WL 5166849, at *4 (S.D. Tex. May 7,\n\n 2007) (holding a class action settlement to be free of fraud or collusion when \u201c[t]he settlement was\n\n reached through arms-length negotiations after a long, hard-fought mediation with a neutral\u201d).\n\n\n\n\n 11\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 18 of 31 PageID 549\n\n\n\n 3. The Settlement is Favorable Given the Complexity, Expense, and Likely\n Duration of the Litigation.\n\n There exists \u201can overriding public interest in favor of settlement, particularly in class\n\n actions that have the well-deserved reputation as being most complex.\u201d Assoc. for Disabled Am.,\n\n Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co., 211 F.R.D. 457, 466 (S.D. Fla. 2002) (citing Cotton, 559 F.2d at 1331).\n\n \u201cWhen the prospect of ongoing litigation threatens to impose high costs of time and money on the\n\n parties, the reasonableness of approving a mutually-agreeable settlement is strengthened.\u201d Klein,\n\n 705 F. Supp. 2d at 651 (citing Ayers v. Thompson, 358 F.3d 356, 369 (5th Cir. 2004)). Here,\n\n Pinnacle entirely denied liability for the Data Incident and in fact moved to dismiss Plaintiff\u2019s\n\n Complaint in its entirety prior to mediation.\n\n This case is settling in its early stages; if the Settlement is not finally approved, the parties\n\n will likely need to litigate through multiple dispositive motions, a motion for class certification, a\n\n potential motion to decertify the class, and multiple Daubert motions, among other things. That\n\n process could take years to resolve, involve expensive expert discovery, and would not guarantee\n\n any greater benefits for the Settlement Class than what has been achieved through the Settlement.\n\n Moreover, the parties will bear the cost of this litigation if it continues. While Plaintiff believes\n\n she has strong claims and would be able to prevail, an early resolution, before both sides spend\n\n time and money on litigation is in the best interest of the Settlement Class. Ayers, 358 F.3d at 369\n\n (\u201cSettling now avoids the risks and burdens of potentially protracted litigation.\u201d).\n\n 4. The State of Litigation and the Available Discovery.\n\n Under the third Reed factor, the key issue is whether \u201cthe parties and the district court\n\n possess ample information with which to evaluate the merits of the competing positions.\u201d In re\n\n Heartland Payment Sys., Inc., 851 F. Supp. 2d at 1064 (quoting Ayers, 358 F.3d at 369). \u201cA\n\n settlement can be approved under this factor even if the parties have not conducted much formal\n\n 12\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 19 of 31 PageID 550\n\n\n\n discovery.\u201d Id. (citations omitted). The \u201c[s]ufficiency of information does not depend on the\n\n amount of formal discovery which has been taken because other sources of information may be\n\n available to show the settlement may be approved even when little or no formal discovery has been\n\n completed.\u201d San Antonio Hispanic Police Officers\u2019 Org., Inc. v. City of San Antonio, 188 F.R.D.\n\n 433, 459 (W.D. Tex. 1999). \u201cThe Court should consider all information which has been available\n\n to all parties.\u201d DeHoyos v. Allstate Corp., 240 F.R.D. at 292 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 21, 2007).\n\n Here, during the settlement negotiations and prior to mediation, Pinnacle produced\n\n significant information about the scope of the Data Incident, the number of potential class\n\n members, the scope of the Data Incident, and the Defendant\u2019s remedial efforts. Doc. 28-2, \u00b6 9.\n\n Drawing on their significant and substantial experience in other data breach class action litigation,\n\n Class Counsel were able to determine the Settlement\u2019s adequacy in relation to the probability of\n\n success on the merits were this litigation to continue. Id., \u00b6\u00b6 19-21. Because the parties \u201cpossess\n\n ample information with which to evaluate the merits of the competing positions,\u201d Ayers, 358 F.3d\n\n at 369, this factor also favors final approval of the proposed settlement. See Reed, 703 F.2d at 172.\n\n 5. The Settlement Terms Appropriately Balance the Merits of Plaintiff\u2019s\n Claims and the Likelihood of Success with the Attendant Risks.\n\n When evaluating a proposed class action settlement, \u201cthe most important factor is the\n\n [fourth Reed factor,] probability of plaintiffs\u2019 success on the merits.\u201d Parker v. Anderson, 667 F.2d\n\n 1204, 1209 (5th Cir. 1982). \u201c[T]he Court must compare the terms of the settlement with the\n\n rewards the class would have been likely to receive following a successful trial.\u201d DeHoyos, 240\n\n F.R.D. at 287 (W.D. Tex. 2007) (citing Reed, 703 F.2d at 172 (5th Cir. 1983)). At the same time,\n\n a district court \u201cmust not try the case in the settlement hearings because the very purpose of the\n\n compromise is to avoid the delay and expense of such a trial.\u201d Id. (internal quotation marks and\n\n alteration omitted). This factor favors approval of the settlement when the class\u2019s likelihood of\n\n 13\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 20 of 31 PageID 551\n\n\n\n success on the merits is not absolute. See In re Corrugated Container Antitrust Litig., 659 F.2d\n\n 1322, 1326-27 (5th Cir. 1981) (affirming district court\u2019s finding that this factor favored approving\n\n the settlement when the class faced major obstacles in establishing proof of liability and damages);\n\n Combustion, 968 F. Supp. at 1128 (\u201cOn the other hand, Plaintiffs will have very serious legal and\n\n evidentiary hurdles to meet in order to get their case to the jury.\u201d).\n\n Similarly, the fifth Reed factor\u2014the range of possible recovery\u2014concerns \u201cwhether the\n\n range of possible recovery or the benefit of the settlement to plaintiffs outweighs the risks of\n\n proceeding through litigation.\u201d DeHoyos, 240 F.R.D. at 290-91. Both of these factors likewise\n\n weigh in favor of final approval.\n\n As outlined above, this Settlement guarantees Settlement Class Members real relief for\n\n harms and protections from potential future fall-out from the Data Incident. The Settlement meets,\n\n or even exceeds, similar to results obtained in other data breach cases, further supporting that this\n\n settlement is fair and adequate such that it should be approved. See, e.g. Corra v. ACTS Ret. Servs.,\n\n No. 22-2917, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 500 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 2, 2024) (preliminary approving data\n\n breach settlement on behalf of 20,754 class members with a $350,000 cap on monetary claims that\n\n provided up to $3,500 for extraordinary losses, up to $350 in ordinary out-of-pocket losses, up to\n\n $75 in lost time, and two years of credit monitoring); Mowery v. Saint Francis Healthcare Sys.,\n\n No. 1:20-cv-00013-SPC (E.D. Mo. Dec. 22, 2020) (data breach settlement providing up to $280\n\n in value to Class Members in the form of: reimbursement up to $180 of out-of-pocket expenses\n\n and time spent dealing with the data breach and credit monitoring services valued at $100); Baksh\n\n v. IvyRehab Network, Inc., No. 7:20-cv-01845 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 27, 2021) (providing up to $75 per\n\n class member for out-of-pocket expenses incurred related to the data breach and $20\n\n reimbursement for lost time, with payments capped at $75,000 in aggregate; credit monitoring for\n\n\n\n 14\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 21 of 31 PageID 552\n\n\n\n claimants; and equitable relief in the form of data security enhancements); Rutledge, et al. v. Saint\n\n Francis Healthcare Sys., No. 1:20-cv-00013-SPC (E.D. Mo.) (data breach settlement providing\n\n up to $280 in value to Class Members in the form of: reimbursement of up to $180 of out-of-pocket\n\n expenses and time spent dealing with the data breach; credit monitoring services valued at $100;\n\n and equitable relief in the form of data security enhancements); Linnins v. HAECO Ams., Inc., No.\n\n 16-cv-486, 2018 WL 5312193, at *1-3 (M.D.N.C. Oct. 26, 2018) (settlement included $312,500\n\n claim fund for reimbursement of specified expenses to employees whose PII was allegedly\n\n disclosed in breach).\n\n The value achieved through the Settlement is guaranteed, where chances of prevailing on\n\n the merits are uncertain. Should litigation continue, Plaintiff would likely have to immediately\n\n survive a motion to dismiss in order to proceed with litigation. Due at least in part to the rapidly\n\n evolving law and minimal Fifth Circuit guidance on data breach jurisprudence, this case faces\n\n uncertainties. Although nearly all class actions involve a high level of risk, expense, and\n\n complexity, this is a particularly complex area of the law given the need to show the technicalities\n\n of how the breach occurred, how it should be prevented, and precisely what information was\n\n impacted. Moreover, the damages methodologies, while theoretically sound in Plaintiff\u2019s view,\n\n remain unproven in front of a jury. Class certification is another hurdle that would have to be\n\n met\u2014and one that has been denied in other data breach cases. See, e.g., In re Hannaford Bros. Co.\n\n Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig., 293 F.R.D. 21 (D. Me. 2013). Another significant risk faced by\n\n Plaintiff here is the risk of maintaining class action status through trial. The class has not yet been\n\n certified, and Defendant will certainly oppose certification if the case proceeds. Thus, Plaintiff\n\n \u201cnecessarily risk[ed] losing class action status.\u201d Grimm v. American Eagle Airlines, Inc., No. LA\n\n CV 11-00406 JAK(MANx), 2014 WL 1274376, at *10 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2014). While Plaintiff\n\n\n\n 15\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 22 of 31 PageID 553\n\n\n\n disputes any defenses Pinnacle asserts and is confident that class certification, and ultimately a\n\n class judgment, is achievable, success is not guaranteed. But through the Settlement, Plaintiff and\n\n the Settlement Class gain significant benefits without having to face the risk of recovering no relief\n\n at all.\n\n 6. Class Counsel and Plaintiff Believe the Settlement is in the Settlement\n Class\u2019s Best Interest.\n\n Plaintiff and Class Counsel firmly believe that this Settlement is fair, reasonable, and\n\n adequate, and in the best interests of the Settlement Class, which is an important consideration in\n\n any class settlement analysis. \u201cThe Fifth Circuit has repeatedly stated that the opinion of class\n\n counsel should be accorded great weight\u201d when \u201cevaluating a proposed settlement.\u201d Klein, 705 F.\n\n Supp. at 649 (citing Pettway v. Am. Cast Iron Pipe Co., 576 F.2d 1157, 1216 (5th Cir. 1978));\n\n DeHoyos, 240 F.R.D. at 292 (\u201cThe endorsement of class counsel is entitled to deference.\u201d). Here,\n\n Settlement Class Counsel are highly experienced in class action litigation generally, and data\n\n breach litigation in particular, and are well positioned to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of\n\n continued litigation, as well as the reasonableness of the Settlement. The assessment of Class\n\n Counsel weighs in favor of final approval. See Stott v. Capital Financial Services, Inc., 277 F.R.D.\n\n 316, 346 (N.D. Tex. 2011) (\u201cAs class counsel tends to be the most familiar with the intricacies of\n\n a class action lawsuit and settlement, \u2018the trial court is entitled to rely upon the judgment of\n\n experienced counsel for the parties.\u2019\u201d) (quoting Cotton, 559 F.2d at 1330).\n\n 7. The Effectiveness of the Proposed Method of Distributing Relief to the\n Class Supports Final Approval.\n\n Subject to Court approval, eligible claims will be paid either electronically or by written\n\n check. Settlement checks and credit monitoring codes will be delivered by the Settlement\n\n\n\n\n 16\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 23 of 31 PageID 554\n\n\n\n Administrator to Settlement Class Members after the Effective Date. This is a simple, clean, and\n\n effective distribution process.\n\n 8. The Settlement Treats Class Members Equitably Relative to Each Other.\n\n The final factor, Rule 23(e)(2)(D), looks at whether Class Members are treated equitably.\n\n See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(2)(D). Here, the Settlement provided for a notice plan that is designed to\n\n reach as many Class Members as possible and provided Class Members with direct mail notice of\n\n the Settlement. It also informed Class Members of their right to object to, or opt out of, the\n\n Settlement. All Class Members were eligible to make a claim for the same categories of monetary\n\n relief and/or to elect the credit monitoring service. Thus, the Settlement treats Class Members\n\n equitably relative to each other, satisfying Rule 23(e)(2)(D).\n\n 9. Reaction of Settlement Class Members.\n\n The reaction of the Settlement Class to this Settlement is overwhelmingly positive. Out of\n\n a class of nearly 10,000 individuals, no one requested exclusion and there were no objections. See\n\n Analytics Decl., \u00b6 12. A number of valid claims have already been submitted, with the claim\n\n deadline still over one month away, indicating that Settlement Class Members are taking advantage\n\n of the availability of the Settlement benefits. Id. \u00b6 14. These benefits, which directly address the\n\n harm claimed in this case, may not have been available at all to Settlement Class Members without\n\n this Settlement.\n\n B. The Court Should Finally Certify the Settlement Class\n\n Settlement classes are routinely certified in consumer data breach cases. There is nothing\n\n unique about this case that would counsel otherwise. This Court already found when it\n\n preliminarily approved the Settlement that it likely would certify the Settlement Class. The\n\n Settlement Class still meets the requirements of numerosity, commonality, typicality, and\n\n\n\n 17\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 24 of 31 PageID 555\n\n\n\n adequacy, and because common issues predominate and a class action is the superior means by\n\n which to resolve class member claims, the Court should finally certify the Settlement Class for\n\n settlement purposes. Where nothing has changed relative to the Rule 23(a) and pertinent Rule\n\n 23(b) factors since preliminary approval, that decision should be made final, for the reasons set\n\n forth in the Plaintiff\u2019s Preliminary Approval Motion and Supporting Memorandum. See Doc. 19.\n\n For completeness purposes, the reasoning in favor of final certification of the Settlement Class\n\n pursuant to Rule 23 is laid out below.\n\n Numerosity. Numerosity requires \u201cthe class [be] so numerous that joinder of all members\n\n is impractical.\u201d Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1). The Fifth Circuit has found that a class of 100 to 150\n\n members \u201cis within the range that generally satisfie[s] the numerosity requirement.\u201d Mullen v.\n\n Treasure Chest Casino, LLC, 186 F.3d 620, 624 (5th Cir. 1999). Here, the Settlement Class of\n\n nearly 10,000 satisfies numerosity.\n\n Commonality. Commonality requires Plaintiff to demonstrate \u201cquestions of law or fact\n\n common to the class.\u201d Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2). Commonality does not require that every question\n\n be common to every member of the class, but rather that the questions linking class members are\n\n substantially related to the resolution of the litigation and are capable of generating common\n\n answers \u201capt to drive the resolution of the litigation,\u201d even where the individuals are not identically\n\n situated. See In re Heartland, 851 F. Supp. 2d at 1052 (citing Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564\n\n U.S. 338, 347 (2011)). Commonality can be satisfied by an \u201cinstance of the defendant's injurious\n\n conduct, even when the resulting injurious effects\u2014the damages\u2014are diverse.\u201d Nelson v.\n\n Constant, 2020 WL 5258454, at *5 (quoting In re Deepwater Horizon, 739 F.3d 790, 810\u201311 (5th\n\n Cir. 2014)). Plaintiff here easily meets the commonality requirement because she can demonstrate\n\n numerous common issues exist, including whether Defendant had a duty to use reasonable care in\n\n\n\n 18\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 25 of 31 PageID 556\n\n\n\n safeguarding Plaintiff\u2019s and the Class\u2019s PII, whether Defendant was negligent in maintaining,\n\n protecting, and securing PII, and whether Defendant breached contract promises to safeguard\n\n Plaintiff and the Class\u2019s PII.\n\n Typicality. Under Rule 23(a)(3), the typicality requirement is satisfied where \u201cthe claims\n\n or defenses of the class representatives have the same essential characteristics as those of the class\n\n as a whole.\u201d Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3). \u201cIf the claims arise from a similar course of conduct and\n\n share the same legal theory, factual differences will not defeat typicality.\u201d See Stirman v. Exxon\n\n Corp., 280 F.3d 554, 562 (5th Cir. 2002); Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3). Here, Plaintiff\u2019s and Settlement\n\n Class Members\u2019 claims all stem from the same event\u2014the cybersecurity attack on Pinnacle\u2019s\n\n computer system\u2014and whether Pinnacle took reasonable steps to protect Plaintiff\u2019s and\n\n Settlement Class Members\u2019 data.\n\n Adequacy. To be adequate, Plaintiff must establish that: (1) there is no antagonism or\n\n conflict of interest between the Class Representative and other class members; and (2) counsel and\n\n the Class Representative are competent, willing, and able to protect the interests of absent class\n\n members. See Feder v. Elec. Data Sys. Corp., 429 F.3d 125, 130 (5th Cir. 2005). Here, Plaintiff\u2019s\n\n interests are aligned with those of the Settlement Class as they are all victims of the Data Incident\n\n and all entitled to the same relief under the Settlement. And Settlement Class Counsel is adequate\n\n based on their significant experience litigating data breach class actions. Doc. 28-2, Exs. C, D.\n\n Predominance. \u201cIn order to \u2018predominate,\u2019 common issues must constitute a significant\n\n part of the individual cases.\u201d Jenkins v. Raymark Industries, Inc., 782 F.2d 468, 472 (5th Cir.\n\n 1986). In this case, key predominating questions are whether Pinnacle had a duty to exercise\n\n reasonable care in safeguarding, securing, and protecting the personal information of Plaintiff and\n\n the Settlement Class Members, and whether Pinnacle breached that duty. The common questions\n\n\n\n 19\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 26 of 31 PageID 557\n\n\n\n that arise from Pinnacle\u2019s conduct predominate over any individualized issues. This satisfies the\n\n predominance element. See, e.g., In re Heartland, 851 F. Supp. 2d at 1059 (finding predominance\n\n satisfied in data breach case despite variations in state laws at issue, concluding such variations\n\n went only to trial management, which was inapplicable for settlement class); Hapka v.\n\n Carecentrix, Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-02372-KGG, 2018 WL 1871449, at *2, 2018 U.S. Dist.\n\n LEXIS 68185 (D. Kan. Feb. 15, 2018) (finding predominance was satisfied in a data breach case,\n\n stating \u201c[t]he many common questions of fact and law that arise from the E-mail Security Incident\n\n and [defendant\u2019s] alleged conduct predominate over any individualized issues\u201d).\n\n Superiority. The resolution of thousands of claims in one action is far superior to litigation\n\n via individual lawsuits. Class certification\u2014and class resolution\u2014guarantee an increase in judicial\n\n efficiency and conservation of resources over the alternative of individually litigating thousands\n\n of data breach cases arising out of the same Data Incident. Because the common questions of fact\n\n and law that arise from Pinnacle\u2019s conduct predominate over any individualized issues, and a class\n\n action is the superior vehicle by which to resolve these issues, and the requirements of\n\n Rule 23(b)(3) are met. Thus, the class should be finally certified for settlement purposes.\n\n C. The Settlement Administrator Provided Notice Pursuant to the Court\u2019s\n Preliminary Approval Order and Satisfied Rule 23 and Due Process.\n\n To satisfy due process, notice to class members must be the best practicable, and\n\n reasonably calculated under all the circumstances to apprise interested parties of the pendency of\n\n the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e); Phillips\n\n Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797, 812 (1985). Notice provided to the class must be sufficient\n\n to allow class members \u201ca full and fair opportunity to consider the proposed decree and develop a\n\n response.\u201d Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 315 (1950). While\n\n individual notice should be provided where class members can be located and identified through\n\n 20\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 27 of 31 PageID 558\n\n\n\n reasonable effort, notice may also be provided by U.S. Mail, electronic, or other appropriate means.\n\n Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B). Under Rule 23(c)(2)(B), the notice must:\n\n clearly and concisely state in plain, easily understood language: (i) the nature of the\n action; (ii) the definition of the class certified; (iii) the class claims, issues, or\n defenses; (iv) that a class member may enter an appearance through an attorney if\n the member so desires; (v) that the court will exclude from the class any member\n who requests exclusion; (vi) the time and manner for requesting exclusion; and (vii)\n the binding effect of a class judgment on members under Rule 23(c)(3).\n\n Here, the direct mail Postcard Notice is the gold standard, and is consistent with Notice\n\n programs approved by other courts. See Stott v. Capital Financial Services, 277 F.R.D. 316, 342,\n\n (N.D. Tex. 2011) (approving notice sent to all class members by first class mail); Billittri v.\n\n Securities America, Inc., Nos. 3:09-cv-01568-F, 3:10-cv-01833-F, 2011 WL 3586217, *9 (N.D.\n\n Tex. Aug. 4, 2011) (same). The content of the Notice provided adequately informed Settlement\n\n Class Members of the nature of the action, the definition of the class, the claims at issue, the ability\n\n of a class member to object or exclude themselves, and/or enter an appearance through an attorney,\n\n and the binding effect of final approval and class judgment. The Notice utilized clear and concise\n\n language that is easy to understand and organized the Notice in a way that allowed Class Members\n\n to easily find any section that they may be looking for. Thus, it was substantively adequate. See\n\n Elna Sefcovic, LLC v. TEP Rocky Mountain, LLC, 807 F. App'x 752, 764 (10th Cir.), cert. denied\n\n sub nom. Gonzalez v. Elna Sefcovic, LLC, 141 S. Ct. 851 (2020) (\u201cAll that the notice must do is\n\n \u2018fairly apprise ... prospective members of the class of the terms of the proposed settlement\u2019 so that\n\n class members may come to their own conclusions about whether the settlement serves their\n\n interests.\u201d) (internal citations omitted).\n\n As outlined in detail in the supporting declaration of the Settlement Administrator, the\n\n Notice Plan here, and its execution, satisfied all the requirements of Rule 23(c). Analytics mailed\n\n notice directly to 9,971 Settlement Class Members. Analytics Decl., \u00b6 7. The Short Notice provided\n\n 21\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 28 of 31 PageID 559\n\n\n\n an overview of the settlement terms, the benefits available, the options available to Class Members,\n\n and the settlement website and toll-free number where additional settlement information could be\n\n obtained. Id., Ex. B. After re-sending undeliverable notices following an advanced address search,\n\n Analytics believes that notice reached 94.5% of the Settlement Class. Id. \u00b6 12. This is an excellent\n\n result. Id.\n\n In addition to the direct mail notice, Analytics established a dedicated website for the\n\n Settlement where relevant documents were posted for Settlement Class Members to review. Id. \u00b6\n\n 8. Also, Analytics established a toll-free telephone number where Settlement Class Members could\n\n call and obtain additional information regarding the Settlement. Id. \u00b6 9.\n\n In sum, the Settlement Administrator and Class Counsel executed a highly successful\n\n notice program that meets all the requirements of Rule 23 and satisfies due process requirements.\n\n The Notice Plan provided the best notice practicable and afforded enough time to provide full and\n\n proper notice to Settlement Class Members before the opt-opt and objection deadlines.\n\n VI. CONCLUSION\n\n For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff requests that the Court enter an order finally\n\n approving the Settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate under Rule 23(e)(2), certifying the\n\n Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the Settlement, and incorporating its prior Order\n\n granting the request for attorneys\u2019 fees, expenses, and service awards.\n\n\n\n Dated: November 4, 2024 Respectfully Submitted,\n\n By: /s/ Raina C. Borrelli\n Raina C. Borrelli (pro hac vice)\n STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC\n One Magnificent Mile\n 980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610\n Chicago, IL, 60611\n\n 22\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 29 of 31 PageID 560\n\n\n\n Telephone: (872) 263-1100\n Facsimile: (872) 263-1109\n raina@straussborrelli.com\n\n Joe Kendall\n KENDALL LAW GROUP PLLC\n 3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 1450\n Dallas, TX 75219\n Telephone: (214) 744-3000\n Facsimile: (214) 744-3015\n jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com\n\n Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class\n\n\n\n\n 23\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 30 of 31 PageID 561\n\n\n\n CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE\n\n I certify that on November 4, 2024, I conferred with John Vogt, counsel for Defendant,\n\n regarding the substance of this motion and he stated that defendant does not oppose the relief\n\n requested herein.\n\n By: /s/ Raina C. Borrelli\n Raina C. Borrelli\n STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC\n One Magnificent Mile\n 980 N Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610\n Chicago IL, 60611\n Telephone: (872) 263-1100\n Facsimile: (872) 263-1109\n raina@straussborrelli.com\n\n\n\n\n 24\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-1 Filed 11/04/24 Page 31 of 31 PageID 562\n\n\n\n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n I, Raina C. Borrelli, hereby certify that on November 4, 2024, I electronically filed the\n\n foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of\n\n such filing to counsel of record, below, via the ECF system.\n\n\n\n DATED this 4th day of November, 2024.\n\n STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC\n\n By: /s/ Raina C. Borrelli\n Raina C. Borrelli\n STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC\n One Magnificent Mile\n 980 N Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610\n Chicago IL, 60611\n Telephone: (872) 263-1100\n Facsimile: (872) 263-1109\n raina@straussborrelli.com\n\n\n\n\n 25\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2026-03-11T18:42:33.212405-07:00","document_number":"29","attachment_number":1,"pacer_doc_id":"177017244095","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Plaintiff's Memorandum in Support of Unopposed Motion for Final Approval o","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747597/","id":422747597,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/29/2/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:48.846134-08:00","date_modified":"2026-03-12T09:48:43.918759-07:00","sha1":"7e9a1700f39d888549fb9cc644df2a3f843da262","page_count":25,"file_size":7670415,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.29.2.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.29.2.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Pagelof25 PagelD 563\n\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\nNORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\nDALLAS DIVISION\n\nAMANDA FITTON, on behalf of herself\nand all others similarly situated,\n\nPlaintiff, Case No. 3:23-CV-1559\nVv.\nPINNACLE PROPANE, LLC,\nDefendant.\n\nDECLARATION OF SETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATOR REGARDING NOTICE\n\nI, Kari L. Schmidt, state as follows:\n\n1. I am currently a Project Manager for Analytics Consulting, LLC (hereinafter\nAnalytics\u2019), located at 18675 Lake Drive East, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317. Analytics provides\nconsulting services to the design and administration of class action and mass tort litigation\nsettlements and notice programs. The settlements Analytics has managed over the past twenty-five\nyears range in size from fewer than 100 class members to more than 40 million, including some of\nthe largest and most complex notice and claims administration programs in history.\n\n2. Analytics\u2019 clients include corporations, law firms (both plaintiff and defense), the\nDepartment of Justice, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Federal Trade\nCommission, which since 1998 has retained Analytics to administer and provide expert advice\nregarding notice and claims processing in their settlements/distribution of funds.\n\n3. In my capacity as Project Manager, I count among my duties responsibility for matters\n\nrelating to the settlement administration for the above-captioned litigation.\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page2of25 PagelD 564\n\n4. Analytics has been engaged in this matter to provide settlement administration\n\nServices.\n\nNotice of Proposed Class Action Settlement\n\n5. On or about July 3, 2024, Analytics received Settlement Class Member data. The data\nincluded files containing 10,011 records of names and addresses of Settlement Class Members. Of\nthese, 37 were identified as duplicate records and three (3) records had no mailing address listed.\nThese 40 records were removed from the population, leaving a total of 9,971 unique Settlement Class\nMember records.\n\n6. Analytics then cross-referenced the Settlement Class Member addresses with the\nUnited States Postal Service National Change of Address database. The Class list was updated with\nany new addresses that were identified.\n\n7. After updating the relevant addresses, on July 31, 2024, Analytics mailed the Court-\napproved Postcard Notice of Class Action Settlement (\u201cPostcard Notice\u201d) to 9,971 Settlement Class\nMembers with a valid mailing address available.\n\n8. Prior to the Notice mailing, Analytics established the Settlement Website,\nwww.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com, where Settlement Class Members could obtain copies of\nthe Settlement Agreement and Release, Long Form Notice, Postcard Notice, Claim Form, and the\nCourt\u2019s Preliminary Approval Order. The Settlement Website also permitted Settlement Class\nMembers to submit a claim form. Copies of the Long Form Notice, Postcard Notice, and Claim Form\n\nare attached herein as Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and Exhibit C, respectively.\n\n9. Analytics also established a toll-free phone number of (1-877-410-5068) and a\ndedicated email box (PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement@noticeadministrator.com) to receive and\nrespond to Settlement Class Member inquiries. The phone number and email address were included\n\nin the Class Notice.\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page3o0f25 PagelD 565\n\n10. Through the date of this Declaration, 38 Notices were returned to Analytics by the\nU.S. Postal Service with a forwarding address. Analytics updated the Class List with the forwarding\naddress and processed a re-mail of the Notice to the updated addresses.\n\n11. Through the date of this Declaration, 949 Notices were returned to Analytics by the\nU.S. Postal Service without a forwarding address. In this case, Analytics conducted a skip trace in an\nattempt to ascertain a valid address for the affected Settlement Class Members. As a result of these\nefforts, 407 new addresses were identified for Settlement Class Members. Analytics subsequently\nupdated the Class list with these new addresses and re-mailed the Notice to each of those addresses.\n\n12. On November 4, 2024, Analytics mailed 9,254 Reminder Postcards to Settlement\nClass Members with a valid mailing address that had not yet returned a Claim Form, including the\n407 Settlement Class Members with updated mailing addresses (as discussed in 4 11). A copy of the\nReminder Postcard is attached herein as Exhibit D. In total, Analytics estimates that at least 9,429\nClass Members (i.e., 94.5% of the total class) successfully received direct notice in this case.\n\nResponse to Class Notice\n\n13. The deadline to object or request exclusion from the Settlement is November 13, 2024.\nTo date, Analytics has received zero (0) requests for exclusion and zero (0) objections.\n\n14. The deadline for Settlement Class Members to submit a claim for cash benefits is\nDecember 13, 2024. To date, Analytics has received a total of 187 claims for at least one form of\nbenefit. Of the 187 claim submissions, two (2) were filed by Non-Class Members and were removed\nfrom the claimant pool. The remaining 185 claims were timely submitted by Settlement Class\nMembers.\n\n15. So far, 182 claims have been deemed valid, and three (3) have been deemed deficient\nand are going through the deficiency process for insufficient supporting documentation for their out-\n\nof-pocket claims. All three (3) deficient claims have already been deemed partially valid, entitling the\n3\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page4of25 PagelD 566\n\nclaimant to at least the lost time and/or credit monitoring benefits. To date, there are 37 valid claims\nfor lost time payments, totaling $7,280.00, and 48 valid claims for the credit monitoring benefit.\nThere are currently 119 valid claims for the alternative cash benefit.\n\n16. Analytics continues to receive and review claims submitted by Settlement Class\nMembers. The deadline for Settlement Class Members to submit a claim is December 13, 2024.\n\n17. Analytics agreed to be the Claims Administrator in exchange for payment of its fees\nand out-of-pocket costs. Estimated expenses for work performed with respect to the provision of\n\nnotice and administration of the Settlement is $28,502.58.\n\nI declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America pursuant to\n\n28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1746 that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and\n\nbelief.\n\nDated: November 4, 2024 LI \u2014\n\nKari L. Schmidt\n\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page5of25 PagelD 567\n\nEXHIBIT A\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page6of25 PagelD 568\nUS DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT COURT OF\n\nTEXAS DALLAS DIVISION\n\nFitton v. Pinnacle Propane, LLC, Case No. 3:23cv1559, United States District Court\nfor the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division\n\nThis Notice May Affect Your Rights. Please read it carefully.\n\nA Court has authorized this Notice. You are not being sued.\nThis is not a solicitation from a lawyer.\n\nA Settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit filed against Pinnacle Propane, LLC (the \u201cDefendant\u201d or\n\u201cPinnacle\u201d) regarding a security breach of its IT system (the \u201cData Incident\u201d) that occurred on approximately December\n4, 2022, when an unauthorized party accessed files in its computer system which contained names, addresses, and Social\nSecurity numbers (\u201cPrivate Information\u201d) of some of Defendant\u2019s current and former employees.\n\nOn July 13, 2023, Plaintiff Amanda Fitton filed a Class Action Complaint against the Defendant in the United States\nDistrict Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Case No. 3:23cv1559 (\u201cClass Action Complaint\u201d).\nThe complaint alleges claims for damages and equitable relief based on theories of negligence, negligence per se, breach\nof implied contract, breach of fiduciary duty, intrusion upon seclusion, and unjust enrichment.\n\nFollowing arms-length negotiations, the Parties negotiated a settlement with the assistance of Hon. Jay C. Gandhi (ret.)\nat a mediation on December 5, 2023, by which the Parties agree and hereby wish to resolve all matters pertaining to,\narising from, or associated with the Litigation, including all claims Plaintiff and Settlement Class Members have or may\nhave had against Pinnacle and related persons and entities, as set forth herein.\n\nClass Members are eligible to receive the following relief: (1) compensation for Out-of-Pocket Losses, up to a total\nof $2,000 per person, upon submission of a valid and timely Claim with supporting documentation, for unreimbursed\nmonetary losses incurred as a result of the Data Incident; (2) compensation for up to six (6) hours of Lost Time, at\n$40.00/hour ($240.00 cap), for time spent mitigating the effects of the Data Incident - Claims for Lost Time can be\ncombined with Claims for Out-of-Pocket Losses but are subject to the $2,000.00 cap; and (3) three (3) years of three-\nbureau Credit Monitoring Services provided by Experian, Equifax, and Transunion, regardless of whether the Class\nMember submits a Claim for reimbursement of Out-of-Pocket Losses or Lost Time. In the alternative to compensation\nfor Out-of-Pocket Losses, Lost Time, or Credit Monitoring, Class Members can elect to make a Claim for up to a $100\nAlternative Cash Payment. To receive this benefit, Class Members must submit a timely and valid Claim Form.\n\nIn the event that Approved Claims for Settlement Benefits (/.e., Credit Monitoring Services, Out-of-Pocket Losses,\nLost Time, and Alternative Cash Payments) exceeds the amount of the Net Settlement Fund, the amount to be paid\nfor Approved Claims for Out-of-Pocket Losses, Lost Time, and the Alternative Cash Payment shall be reduced on a\npro rata basis and paid in accordance with the terms and conditions in the Settlement Agreement. In the event the Net\nSettlement Fund exceeds the Approved Claims for Settlement Benefits (7.e., Credit Monitoring Services, Out-of-Pocket\nLosses, Lost Time, and Alternative Cash Payments), then the Residual Funds shall be paid in accordance with the terms\nof the Settlement Agreement such that additional monetary payments to the Settlement Class Members who submitted\nApproved Claims for cash payments (7.e., compensation for Unreimbursed Economic Loss, Lost Time or Alternative\nCash Payment) in equal amounts, provided that no Settlement Class Member receives more than two times the amount\nof their payment in their original Approved Claim.\n\nThe Settlement Administrator will post additional information about the payment amount on\nwww.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com. For complete details, please see the Settlement Agreement, whose terms\ncontrol, available at www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com.\n\nYour legal rights are affected regardless of whether you act or do not act. Please read this Notice carefully.\n\nQUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-410-5068 OR VISIT www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com\n1\n\fLS\n\n> Len Of = ede heal rt. Dee ehh el teal C. \u2014. Ll C.\nVdot 0.f2o-UV-ULIII-D VOCUTTTIEMIT 2I-2 HCO LLU) co Paye f Ol Zo Payeily VOg\n\nYOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND OPTIONS IN THIS SETTLEMENT:\n\nThis is the only way you may receive benefits from this Settlement. The deadline\n\nSO Oy to submit a Claim Form is DECEMBER 13, 2024.\n\nGet out of the lawsuit and the Settlement. This is the only option that allows\nyou to ever bring or join another lawsuit raising the same legal claims against\nthe Defendant. You will receive no payment or Credit Monitoring Services\nunder this Settlement. You may download an exclusion form at www.\nPinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com. The deadline to exclude yourself from\nthe Settlement is NOVEMBER 13, 2024.\n\nEXCLUDE YOURSELF\nFROM THE SETTLEMENT\n\u201cOPT-OUT\u201c\n\nWrite to the Court, with a copy to Class Counsel and Defendant\u2019s Counsel, about\nany aspect of the Settlement you don\u2019t like or you don\u2019t think is fair, adequate,\nOBJECT TO THE or reasonable. (If you object to any aspect of the Settlement, you must submit\nSETTLEMENT a written Objection and that Objection must be received by the Deadline. Your\nObjection must follow the Objection Procedures stated herein. The deadline to\nobject to the Settlement is NOVEMBER 13, 2024.\n\nYou may ask the Court for permission for you or your attorney to speak about\nyour objection at the Final Approval Hearing. (If you object to any aspect of\nthe Settlement, you must submit a written Objection by the Objection Deadline\nnoted above. If you Opt-Out of the Settlement you cannot object.) The Final\nApproval Hearing will be held on December 3, 2024 at 10:00 AM.\n\nATTEND THE FINAL\nAPPROVAL HEARING\n\nIf you do nothing you will not receive any payment or the free Credit Monitoring\nDO NOTHING Services. You will have no right to sue the Defendant later for the claims released\nby the Settlement.\n\nThese rights and options\u2014and the deadlines to exercise them\u2014are explained in this Notice. For complete details,\nplease see the Settlement Agreement, whose terms control, available at www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com.\n\nThe Court in charge of this case still has to decide whether to approve the Settlement. No settlement benefits or payments\nwill be provided unless the Court approves the Settlement and it becomes Final.\n\nQUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-410-5068 OR VISIT www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com\n2\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B DagyanrRas NOATIeCRIGON/PAINSPage 8 of 25 PagelD 570\n\nBASIC INFORMATION ............ccsssscsssssssesssessecessesessssescesesessecessesensesessesesssseceaseceesesensecessesesseseasoceesesensesesssseceaseceesesensesees 4\n1. What is this Notice and why should I read it? 0.0.0.0 ccc eects cesececeeceeecesecsecseeeseeseesecsseceeesecaecaeeesensenseeseeeeeeseeeeaeens 4\n2. What is a class action lawsuit? ......0..0.00ccccccecccecc cece cescesecseesceesceseeueeseeceeeseesecsaecseeesecseesecseeseeseecseesseseesaeeasesseeseeseeseeseeeseeseenes 4\nTHE CLAIMS IN THE LAWSUIT AND THE SETTLEMENT. ......0... cc scccsessesessscescecsersecesseseesecsesecsesesensesees 4\n3. What is this lawsuit aDOUt? ooo... occ cece cee ee esses seseeseesecseeeseesecseesecsessesessecsesseessuecsessecseeseseeessessetseesetesetseteeteseeseteed 4\n4, Why is there a Settlement? 000000000 ene rE Een DEE En ED EISELE ECLE Eb d ec de cette eottebtetiaseiaeenintirenireniiennieees 4\nWHO\u2019S INCLUDED IN THE SETTLEMENT? 0... scsccsessssncecsesccsecescesessesecssseccesessssecessecessesessecesscsesensesees 4,5\n5. How do I know if I am in the Settlement Class? .o0.00000 00000 lec cece cccnneccecnnecececnseececnnseeccnnsescecsnsescesntsseecnnsseesnnaeeess 4,5\nTHE SETTLEMENT BENEFITS... esccsessccessesencecescesessesesessesessecessecessesessesesessesessasecsesessasasessesessesessesesseses 5, 6\n6. What benefits does the settlement provide? 00.00.0000 ccc eee eee eee ec nebo bbe b bit bte tbe be feiebittittetetieteteteiecsensey 5, 6\nHOW TO GET BENEFITS 00. esssssccnceccesscscncessssscscecessssscececssssscececessecacecessssscacessssssscacesessssscecesessssscscesessesseees 6\n7. How do I make a Claim? oo... ccc cccccccecces ces cesceseececescesecsaeeseesceeseesecsecseecseeseesecsaecaeeeenaecseeeseeseesecseeeseeseeeenaesaeeeenees 6\n8. When will I get my payment? 0000000 enn EEE EEE EE cE SO EE ED EE ED EEC CIEE bide Sie SESE SDE ebetbiteieeiaseaeenees 6\nTHE LAWYERS REPRESENTING YOU... esssssesessssececscessssscecscessssscecececssssssessesecensesssscecensesesececensecececesensesess 6\n9. Do Thave a lawyer in this Case? o.oo... cocci cee cence ene nnn Een Een OEE SD EEE CEE EEE Ee cede cide ESE ebe tba decide eiaesieeniiesireneieetieess 6\n10. How will the lawyers be paid? oo... ccc ccce cece ceccec ces cesecseececeseesaecsecseesecesecsseseeeseesecsecseecseesecsetseesseeseesesseeseeseesseeseeaes 6\nYOUR RIGHTS AND OPTIONS. 000000 sececesessssececesessscsceccsssscscncessssscscncessssscecesecensesececesensesscesecessesecesesenseseceseses 6-9\n11. What claims do I give up by participating in this settlement? 00000000000 ce ee ces tee ce cet cesessettetteteteeseies 6,7\n12. What happens if I do nothing at all? o.oo cc ee eee cece n ncn ence E DUE SO ECE ced eUHebsebbE teat betbienietascittiteessieits 7\n13. What happens if I ask to be excluded from the settlement? ...0000.00000 coco cece cece ccc cece ee tees seteenteenteetstensteerintienteniieens 7\n14. How do I opt-out of the settlement? 0.00.00 ccc ence eee DEE DnE Fede cae coe cir tnd tbti teas ciectieeteesteeneees 7\n15. If I don\u2019t exclude myself, can I sue Defendant for the same thing later? 00000000000 ee tees eet eteetteetteenieees 8\n16. If I exclude myself, can I get anything from this settlement? 00000000000 ccc ceee sees eee ecte este enteenetentecieeteeniees 8\n17. How do I object to the settlemmemt? 0.00000 cece nner cece ECE En EDL eb de cae cone CtE frre stiteaecniestieetieeiteenieees 8\n18. What\u2019s the difference between objecting and excluding myself from the settlement? .....00000.00 coool ccceeteeeteeneens 9\nTHE COURT?\u2019S FINAL APPROVAL HEARING .....ccesssssscssesesssesececssescecececcececscesensecssscecensecscscacecsssasseeceseseess 9\n19. When and where will the Court have the Final Approval Hearing to determine the fairness of the settlement? ............. 9\n20. Do I have to come to the hearing? oo... ccc cc ee ne een REC nE SOc E DLE DEE SC de be dee db debiESateattittiesienietiateeteetsits 9\n21. May I speak at the Final Approval Hearing? 0000000000000 ccc cece cece ccc e cece beter nett ced ebiebtetieceatcieesseettiteetseteiseseees 9\nGETTING MORE INFORMATION ..00.0. i escsecssccsesesccsessesecsssesscsecsssesensessssecasecessesessesessesessescsesesseseseaseceeseseseesers 9\n22. Where can I get additional information? 000000000000 ccc ccc cece e ete ee cnn c cect ect ec ae ce ebne enti etietiaesascniniiienirentieetieens 9\n\nQUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-410-5068 OR VISIT www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com\n3\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B DOCUM@X SR e4ANFORMAWPGR4 $jPage9of25 PagelID 571\n\n1. What is this Notice and why should I read it?\n\nThe Court authorized this Notice to inform you about a proposed settlement with Defendant. You have legal rights and\noptions that you may act on before the Court decides whether to approve the proposed settlement. You may be eligible to\nreceive a cash payment and free Credit Monitoring Services as part of the settlement. This Notice explains the lawsuit, the\nsettlement, and your legal rights.\n\nAmanda Fitton (\u201cPlaintiff or \u201cSettlement Class Representative\u201d), individually and on behalf of the Settlement Class\n(defined below); and (ii) Pinnacle Propane, LLC (\u201cPinnacle\u201d or \u201cDefendant\u201d), in the case of Fitton v. Pinnacle Propane,\nLLC, Case No. 3:23cv1559, pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division.\nPinnacle and Plaintiff are collectively referred to herein as the \u201cParties.\u201d The lawsuit being resolved is referred to herein as\nthe \u201cLitigation.\u201d\n\n2. What is a class action lawsuit?\n\nA class action is a lawsuit in which one or more plaintiffs\u2014in this case, Amanda Fitton, sue on behalf of a group of people\nwho have similar claims. In a class action, the court resolves the issues for all class members, except those who exclude\nthemselves from the class. In this case, the Class is defined as:\n\nAll Individuals whose Private Information was compromised or potentially compromised in the Data\nIncident disclosed by Pinnacle in June 2023.\n\nTHE CLAIMS IN THE LAWSUIT AND THE SETTLEMENT\n\n3. What is this lawsuit about?\n\nPinnacle experienced a cyberattack on December 4, 2022, when certain of its IT systems containing Private Information\nstored by Pinnacle was potentially compromised. The Plaintiff filed the Lawsuit claiming that Defendant failed to implement\nand maintain reasonable security measures necessary to protect their Private Information that it maintained on its computer\nsystems, in order to prevent the Data Incident from occurring.\n\nDefendant denies all allegations that its data security practices were improper or insufficient, or that its actions in\nany way led to the Data Incident. The Court has not determined whether Plaintiff or Defendant are correct. More\ninformation about the Class Action Complaint filed in the Lawsuit can be found on the Settlement Website at\nwww.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com.\n\n4. Why is there a Settlement?\n\nOn December 5, 2023, the Parties participated in a mediation with the assistance of Hon. Jay C. Gandhi (ret.). Following\narms-length negotiations, the Parties negotiated a settlement by which they agreed to resolve all matters pertaining to, arising\nfrom, or associated with the Litigation, including all claims Plaintiff and the Settlement Class Members have or may have had\nagainst Pinnacle and related persons and entities. Throughout the mediation the Parties engaged in an extensive evaluation\nand discussion of the relevant facts and law. The Parties agreed to this settlement, and dismissal of the Lawsuit under the\nterm of the Settlement Agreement, to avoid the uncertainty, risks, and expense of ongoing Litigation. The Settlement Class\nRepresentative and Class Counsel, attorneys for the Class Members, believe the terms of the settlement are fair, reasonable,\nadequate, and equitable, and that the settlement is in the best interests of the Settlement Class Members. The settlement is\nnot an admission of any wrongdoing by Defendant nor that the Lawsuit is without merit.\n\nWHO\u2019S INCLUDED IN THE SETTLEMENT?\n\n5. How do I know if I am in the Settlement Class?\n\nThis Lawsuit involves personally identifiable information (\u201cPII\u2019\u2019) stored by Pinnacle that was potentially compromised\nby unauthorized entities in a cyberattack against Pinnacle\u2019s computer systems on December 4, 2022, and which Pinnacle\ndisclosed beginning in June 2023 (\u201cData Incident\u201d). Current and former employees of Pinnacle whose Private Information\n\nQUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-410-5068 OR VISIT www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com\n4\n\fwas storedCon : Bimacie\u2019s VoknRiter Raa wHel sReatiall 7 oehproiAed4in the dita WdMeab wilPROatiecRd2by the\n\nsettlement. Specifically, members of the Settlement Class, defined below, will be affected.\n\nThe Settlement Class Representative and Defendant will ask the Court to certify a Settlement Class defined as \u201call Individuals\nwhose Private Information was compromised or potentially compromised in the Data Incident disclosed by Pinnacle in June\n2023.\u201d The Settlement Class specifically excludes: (1) the judge(s) presiding over this Lawsuit and members of their families;\n(2) the Defendant, its subsidiaries, parent companies, successors, predecessors, and any entity in which the Defendant of\nits parents have a controlling interest and their current or former officers, directors, and employees; (3) Settlement Class\nMembers who submit a valid Request for Exclusion prior to the Opt-Out Deadline; and (4) successors or assigns of any such\nexcluded natural persons.\n\nIf the settlement does not become effective (for example, because it is not finally approved, or the approval is reversed on\nappeal), then the Litigation will continue.\n\nTHE SETTLEMENT BENEFITS\n\n6. What benefits does the settlement provide?\n\nAll Settlement Class Members are eligible to receive a cash payment and/or free Credit Monitoring Services. To receive\nbenefits from the settlement, you must complete and return the Claim Form which is available on the Settlement Website at\nwww.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com.\n\nSettlement Benefits for eligible Settlement Class members include: (1) compensation for Out-of-Pocket Losses, up to a total\nof $2,000 per person, upon submission of a timely and valid Claim with supporting documentation for Out-of-Pocket Losses\nincurred as a result of the Data Incident; (2) compensation for up to six (6) hours of Lost Time, at $40.00/hour ($240.00\ncap), for time spent mitigating the effects of the Data Incident - Claims for Lost Time can be combined with Claims for Out-\nof-Pocket Losses but are subject to the $2,000.00 cap; and (3) three (3) years of three-bureau Credit Monitoring Services\nwhich includes identity restoration services and $1 million in identity theft insurance, provided by Experian, Equifax,\nand Transunion, regardless of whether the Class Member submits a Claim for reimbursement of Out-of-Pocket Losses\nor Lost Time.\n\nIn the alternative to compensation for Out-of-Pocket Losses, Lost Time, and/or Credit Monitoring, Class Members can elect\nto make a Claim for up to a $100.00 Alternative Cash Payment. To receive this benefit, Settlement Class Members must\nsubmit a timely and valid Claim Form.\n\n6.A. Who May Recover for Out-of-Pocket Losses and Lost Time and for How Much?\n\n\u00a2 If you are a Class Member and you incurred out-of-pocket costs or expenditures that are supported by Reasonable\nDocumentation. \u201cOut-of-Pocket Losses\u201d must be \u201ca result\u201d of the Data Incident, and such expenses have not already\nbeen reimbursed by a third party. These Out-of-Pocket Losses incurred as a result of the Data Incident may include,\nwithout limitation, expenses unreimbursed costs associated with fraud or identity theft, including professional fees\nand fees for credit repair services and miscellaneous expenses, such as (i) notary, (ii) fax, (iii) postage, (iii) copying,\n(iii) mileage, and (iv) long-distance telephone charges, as well as costs for credit monitoring costs or other mitigative\nservices that were incurred on or after December 4, 2022.\n\n* For Lost Time spent remedying the issues related to the Data Incident, you may receive compensation for up to six\n(6) hours at $40 per hour ($240.00 cap). You must attest that any claimed Lost Time was spent remedying the issues\nrelated to the Data Incident.\n\n* For complete details, please see the Settlement Agreement, whose terms control, available at\nwww.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com. Claims will be subject to a verification process and will be denied if\nthey do not meet the verification requirements. The Settlement Administrator will post additional information about\nthe payment amount on www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com, if necessary.\n\n6.B. Who may receive three years of Credit Monitoring Services?\n\n\u00a2 All Class Members are eligible to enroll for three (3) years of three-bureau credit monitoring services, identity\nrestoration services, and $1 million in identity theft insurance, provided by Experian, Equifax, and Transunion,\nregardless of whether the Class Member submits a Claim for reimbursement of Out-of-Pocket Losses or Lost Time.\nHowever, if a Class Member elects to receive the Alternative Cash Payment, they are not eligible to enroll in the\nCredit Monitoring Services.\n\nQUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-410-5068 OR VISIT www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com\n5\n\f- Thasartenexdatiastabdr will QaKe West chSr\u00e9s to SeHe dn hb{AAlon codFa Gack tall SPedit VRARUEINB Services\nclaimant with Approved Claims within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date which can be used to activate Credit\nMonitoring Services.\n\n6.C. Who May Receive $100 Alternative Cash Payment?\n\n* In the alternative to compensation for Out-of-Pocket Losses, Lost Time, and Credit Monitoring, Class Members may\nmake a Claim for a cash payment of up to $100. To receive this benefit, Class Members must submit a valid and timely\nClaim Form selecting this option, but no documentation is required to make a Claim.\n\nHOW TO GET BENEFITS\n\n7. How do I make a Claim?\n\nTo qualify for a settlement benefit, you must complete and submit a Claim Form. Class Members who want to submit a\nClaim must fill out and submit a Claim Form online at www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com or by USPS mail. Claim\nForms are available through the Settlement Website at www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com or Class Members may\ncall the Settlement Administrator and request that a copy of the Claim Form be mailed to them.\n\nClaims will be subject to a verification process. If you received a Notice with a Unique ID you must include it on your Claim\nForm. All Claim Forms must be received online or postmarked on or before DECEMBER 13, 2024.\n\n8. When will I get my payment?\n\nThe Final Approval Hearing when the Court considers the fairness of the settlement is scheduled for December 3, 2024, at\n10:00 AM. If the Court approves the settlement, eligible Class Members whose Claims were approved by the Settlement\nAdministrator will be sent payment within sixty (60) days after: (i) the Effective Date; or (ii) the date when all Claim Forms\nhave been processed subject to the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement, whichever date is later.\n\nTHE LAWYERS REPRESENTING YOU\n\n9. Do I have a lawyer in this case?\n\nYes, the Court has appointed Strauss Borrelli PLLC as \u201cClass Counsel.\u201d\n\nShould I get my own lawyer?\n\nYou don\u2019t need to hire your own lawyer because Class Counsel are working on your behalf. These lawyers and their firms\nare experienced in handling similar cases. You will not be charged for these lawyers. You can retain your own lawyer to\nappear in Court for you, at your own cost, if you want someone other than Class Counsel to represent you.\n\n10. How will the lawyers be paid?\n\nClass Counsel will ask the Court for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and expenses that will be paid from the Settlement Fund. Class\nCounsel will not seek more than one-third (33.33%) of the Settlement Fund, or $163,333.33 in attorneys\u2019 fees and up to\n$20,000.00 in Litigation costs and expenses. Class Counsel will also request a Service Award of up to $5,000.00 for the\nSettlement Class Representative. The Court will determine the proper amount of any attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and expenses to\naward Class Counsel and the proper amount of any service award to the Settlement Class Representative. The Court may\naward less than the amounts requested.\n\nYOUR RIGHTS AND OPTIONS\n\n11. What claims do I give up by participating in this settlement?\n\nIf you do not exclude yourself from this settlement, you will not be able to sue the Defendant or any of the Released\nParties about the Claims in the settlement and you will be bound by all decisions made by the Court in this case and the\nterms of the settlement, including its Release. This is true regardless of whether you submit a Claim Form. Please read the\nSettlement Agreement at www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com for full details. However, you may exclude yourself\nfrom this settlement (see Question 14). If you exclude yourself from the settlement, you will not be bound by the Settlement\nAgreement, including, the Released Claims, but you will not be able to make a claim for any benefits under the Settlement.\nQUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-410-5068 OR VISIT www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com\n6\n\f\u201cReledsabClanndGheadP ay And SMOMBME Or VBnges oF KeGoA WPA kinPade de@ipAsn, imCAGRAP aniAcauses\n\nof action in law, claims in equity, complaints, suits or petitions, and any allegations of wrongdoing, demands for legal,\nequitable or administrative relief (including, but not limited to, any claims for injunction, rescission, reformation, restitution,\ndisgorgement, constructive trust, declaratory relief, compensatory damages, consequential damages, penalties, exemplary\ndamages, punitive damages, attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, interest or expenses) that Releasing Parties had, have or may claim now\nor in the future to have (including but not limited to, assigned claims and any and all \u201cUnknown Claims\u201d) that were or could\nhave been asserted or alleged arising out of the same nucleus of operative facts as any of the claims alleged or asserted in the\nAction, including but not limited to the facts, transactions, occurrences, events, acts, omissions, or failures to act that were\nalleged, argued, raised or asserted in any pleading or court filing in the Action, including but not limited to those concerning\nthe Data Incident. The Released Claims include the release of Unknown Claims.\n\nThe Settlement Agreement describes the Release, Released Claims, and Unknown Claims so please read it carefully. The\nSettlement Agreement is available at www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com or in the public Court records on file in\nthis lawsuit. For questions regarding Release and what they mean, you can also contact one of the lawyers listed in Question\n17 for free, or you can, talk to your own lawyer at your own expense.\n\nThe Released Claims do not include the right of Plaintiff, any Settlement Class Member, or any Releasing Party to enforce\nthe terms of the Settlement Agreement.\n\n12. What happens if I do nothing at all?\n\nIf you do nothing, you will not receive any payment or free Credit Monitoring Services under the settlement. You will be in\nthe Class, and if the Court approves the settlement, you will also be bound by all orders and judgments of the Court and the\nSettlement Agreement, including the Release. Unless you exclude yourself, you won\u2019t be able to file a lawsuit or be part of\nany other lawsuit against Defendant or the Released Parties for any of the claims or legal issues resolved in this settlement.\n\n13. What happens if I ask to be excluded from the settlement?\n\nIf you exclude yourself from the settlement, you will receive no benefits, payment, or free Credit Monitoring Services\nunder the settlement. However, you will not be in the Settlement Class and will not be legally bound by the Court\u2019s\norders and judgments related to the Class and Defendant in this Lawsuit or the terms of the Settlement Agreement,\nincluding the Release.\n\n14. How do I opt-out of the settlement?\n\nYou can opt-out of the settlement by submitting a Request for Exclusion to the Settlkement Administrator online or\npostmarked no later than the Opt-Out Deadline. You can get a copy of the Request for Exclusion to opt-out of the settlement\nfrom the website www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com, by calling the Settlement Administrator at 1-877-410-5068\nand requesting a Request for Exclusion form be mailed to you, or by submitting a document that includes the name of the\nproceeding, the individual\u2019s full name, current address, personal signature, and the words \u201cRequest for Exclusion\u201d or a\ncomparable statement that the individual does not wish to participate in the settlement in the communication. The Notice\nmust state that any Settlement Class Member who does not file a timely Request for Exclusion in accordance with this\nParagraph will lose the opportunity to exclude himself or herself from the settlement and will be bound by the settlement.\nYou must submit your Request for Exclusion to the Settlement Administrator either online or by mail postmarked no later\nthan NOVEMBER 13, 2024, to the following address:\n\nPinnacle Propane Data Settlement\nc/o Analytics Consulting LLC\nPO Box 2009\nChanhassen, MN 55317-2009\n\nYou cannot exclude yourself by phone or email. Each Class Member who wants to be excluded from the settlement must\nsubmit his or her own exclusion request. No group opt-outs shall be permitted.\n\nQUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-410-5068 OR VISIT www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com\n7\n\f15. If Fon 4 cecRe aHselh car PAW Tenant fok the sabieWhihg lakkeee 13 of 25 PagelD 575\n\nNo. Unless you exclude yourself, you give up any right to sue Defendant or the Released Parties for the claims being\nresolved by this settlement.\n\n16. If I exclude myself, can I get anything from this settlement?\n\nNo. If you exclude yourself, you are not eligible to submit a Claim Form or request any settlement payment or free Credit\nMonitoring Services.\n\n17. How do I object to the settlement?\n\nIf you do not exclude yourself from the Class, you can object to the settlement if you do not agree with any part of it. You can\nalso object to Class Counsel\u2019s request for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and a service award from the Plaintiff. Even if you object to\nthe settlement, you remain a member of the Settlement Class and are entitled to file a claim for benefits under the Settlement.\n\nYou can give reasons why you think the Court should deny approval of the settlement by filing a written objection. To object,\nyou must file written notice with the Court stating that you object to the settlement in Fifton v. Pinnacle Propane, LLC, Case\nNo. 3:23cv1559, United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division by NOVEMBER 13, 2024.\nYour objection must be filed with the Court, which you can do by mailing your objection and any supporting documents to\nthe United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, at the following address:\n\nUnited States District Court\n1100 Commerce Street, Room 1452\nDallas, TX 75242\n\nIf you are represented by a lawyer, the lawyer may file your objection through the Court\u2019s e-filing system. If you are\nrepresented, you must include the identity of any and all attorneys representing you in the objection.\n\nThe objection must be in writing and include the case name, Fitton v. Pinnacle Propane, LLC, Case No. 3:23cv1559, United\nStates District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. Your objection must also include the following\ninformation: (i) the name of the proceedings; (ii) the Settlement Class Member\u2019s full name, current mailing address, and\ntelephone number; (iii) a statement that states with specificity the grounds for the objection, as well as any documents\nsupporting the objection; (iv) a statement as to whether the objection applies only to the objector, to a specific subset of the\nSettlement Class, or to the entire Settlement Class; (v) the identity of any attorneys representing the objector; (vi) a statement\nregarding whether the Settlement Class Member (or his/her attorney) intends to appear at the Final Approval Hearing; (vii) a\nlist of all other matters in which the objecting Settlement Class Member and/or his/her attorney has lodged an objection to a\nclass action settlement; and (viii) the signature of the Settlement Class Member or the Settlement Class Member\u2019s attorney.\n\nIn addition to filing your objection with the Court, you must also mail copies of your objection and any supporting\ndocuments to both Class Counsel and Defendant\u2019s lawyers at the addresses listed below, postmarked no later than\nNOVEMBER 13, 2024:\n\nClass Counsel Defense Counsel\n\nRaina Borrelli John A. Vogt\nSTRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC JONES DAY\n\nOne Magnificent Mile 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800\n980 N Michigan Avenue Irvine, California 92612\nSuite 1610 javogt@jonesday.com\nChicago IL, 60611\nraina(@straussborrelli.com\n\nQUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-410-5068 OR VISIT www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com\n8\n\f18. Whats fhe diffaathee hetweed Ghjeeting 4rd exchWaing bei front AeSettiGin\u00e9nt? Page!D 576\n\nObjecting means that you are telling the Court that you don\u2019t like something about the settlement. You can object only if\nyou stay in the Class. Excluding yourself from the Class means that you don\u2019t want to be part of the Class. If you exclude\n\nyourself, you have no basis to object.\nTHE COURT\u2019S FINAL APPROVAL HEARING\n\n19. When and where will the Court have the Final Approval Hearing to determine the fairness\nof the settlement?\n\nThe Court will hold the Final Approval Hearing on December 3, 2024, at 10:00 AM at 1100 Commerce St, Dallas, TX\n75242. The purpose of the hearing is for the Court to determine whether the settlement is fair, reasonable, adequate, and in\nthe best interests of the Class. At the hearing, the Court will hear any objections and arguments concerning the fairness of\nthe proposed settlement, including those related to the amount requested by Class Counsel for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and\nexpenses and the Service Award payment to the Settlement Class Representative.\n\nNote: The date and time of the Final Approval Hearing are subject to change by Court Order. Any changes will be posted\nat the Settlement Website, www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com, or through the Court\u2019s publicly available docket.\nYou should check the Settlement Website to confirm the date and time have not been changed.\n\n20. Do I have to come to the hearing?\n\nNo. Class Counsel will answer any questions the Court may have, but you are welcome to attend the hearing at your own\nexpense. If you send an objection, you don\u2019t have to come to Court to talk about it. As long as your written objection was\ntimely filed and mailed and meets all of the requirements described in the Settlement Agreement, the Court will consider it.\nYou may also pay a lawyer to attend on your behalf at your own expense, but you don\u2019t have to.\n\n21. May I speak at the Final Approval Hearing?\n\nYes. If you do not exclude yourself from the Class, you may ask the Court for permission to speak at the Final Approval\nHearing concerning any part of the proposed settlement.\n\nGETTING MORE INFORMATION\n\n22. Where can I get additional information?\n\nThis Notice summarizes the proposed Settlement. More details are in the Settlement Agreement, which is available on the\nSettlement Website at www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com.\n\nYOU MAY CONTACT THE SETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATOR ONLINE AT\nwww.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com., BY CALLING TOLL-FREE AT 1-877-410-5068 OR WRITING TO:\n\nPinnacle Propane Data Settlement\nc/o Analytics Consulting LLC\nPO Box 2009\nChanhassen, MN 55317-2009\n\nPLEASE DO NOT CALL THE COURT, THE CLERK OF THE COURT, THE JUDGE, OR THE DEFENDANT\nWITH QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SETTLEMENT OR CLAIMS PROCESS.\n\nQUESTIONS? CALL 1-877-410-5068 OR VISIT www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com\n9\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page15of25 PagelD 577\n\nEXHIBIT B\n\fPage 16 of 25 PagelD 578\n\nFiled 11/04/24\n\n23-CV-01559-B Document 29-2\n\nCase 3\n\n'9906-OI F-LL8-] Aniuny vpend qoundsa ua uolovusofi spi vAv gt\n\n\u201cWO JUAaMIaIGE}ECaUedo.1Ja[IVUULY MAA 1B\nSQETIBAR JUS WIDAIBY JUD WE[NES puv SoTION WHOJ-Buo'T oy] UL puny aq\nueo suotdo pur syyB1I INCA ynoge UCYBULIOJUT SIOP\\[ \u2018UONVULIOJUT 2.10],\n\n\u2018Sunesy oy} ye uorsefqo mod jnoge\n\n\u2018s09 TMO MOA je \u201cyeads Azur AouIOWe Mo 30 APU noX \u2018suoTs[qo Aue\npue \u2018spieMme dd1AJas \u2018sasuadxa pure \u2018sjsoo \u2018saay sAauIoye \u201cyuauaTnEas\nay) aaoidde 0} 1YIOYA splosp 0} \u2018JV 00:01 38 \u2018FZOTZ \u2018\u00a2 A9quiasaqy\nJo] Suleay & paynpayos sey yNoD sy], \u2018SuLiwap [eAosddy [eury oy L\n\u2018SIBJap [[NJ JO JUSWIaISYy JUSUTETI}Eg9\n\nDY] 99S asBo[q \u201cWIL[D B SYBU O} J{qISI[S pue sse[D JUSUTaTEg 9y) UT\nUreural NOA JuoUTaTHS By} 01 Jalgo NOA J \u201cPZOZ \u2018ET AAAINAAON Aq\nJusMa[Heg sy} 0} algo Avut NOA \u2018sasmoA apnyoxe Jou Op NOA J] \u201cFZ0Z\n\u2018CL UAPINGDAON Aq J[28N04 apnjoxa ysnuar nod YI Woy syyaueq Aue\nDATI0aI JO JUSUATHEg 94} Aq puNog ATTeSa] 9q Oo} JUBA JOU OP NOA JT\n\u2018JUSPIOUT BBC 9Y} JO ino Burstie sored poye[al Jo JUBpUayacy IsuTeSe\nyins Me] Joyjo Aue Jo ped aq Jo snuNUOS \u201cyRIS 0} BTqQe 9q JOU T[LM Nok\npue uno_ sy} Jo siepso [ye Aq punog AT[eBa] oq [JIM NOX \u2018aseayoy sjt\nSUIPNOUT SLID} S}I 0] pUNOg 9q PUR SsBI_D 34} UT Avjs [[LM NOX \u201cBuryjou op\nIO \u2018USWASTHSg By} 01 JOAfGo \u2018MU0,J UNETD B s[y NOAJ] \u2018suondg 1940 M0\n\n\u2018ssoo0id UOTIROYLIOA B O} Joo[qns oq [IM SUNE[D \u201cPZ0Z\n\u2018CL UAAINADAC UoJoq Io Uo WodyuIMA}YJaGUIe GQauLdoAgapeUULg\n\u201cMMA 1B AT[BOTUOIOITO poytuqns Jo payieuysod aq ysnw WIOY\nWIRTD oUL \u2018Wod UaMaPIGUPUCGoULdOIgaIVUUT MMM 1B\nO[QRIIBAB \u201cULIOT WIRTD & WUIQns IsNUI NOX :spyousg 195) Of MOFT\n\n\u201cWOdJUIUIITIS EVV aued 0.1 {a[IVUU TAAL\n12 SQRTTBAR \u2018OUOD SUID] SOU \u2018JUSUDAISY JUSUOTIEg OY] 908 aseatd\n\u2018s[tejap a19[du109 Joy \u2018stseq eel old B UO paonpal Ajayeuotpodoid aq [[eys\n(sus WAR YSeD SALVUIO][Y PUB SUM], 1sO\u2019] \u2018sasso\u2019] JaYog-Jo-INO Joy\nuojesuaduios \u201ca'1) suelQ peaoiddy Surureutal oy} ul sjuawAed yseo\nJo} sjsonbal [Te \u2018puocsg \u2018sume[Q peaoiddy uo pred aq [Teys saotarag\nSLO MOY WPeTD IOJ suME]D [[e \u201cISAL{ \u201capo SULMOT[OF sy) UL s}yOUAg\n\nJUSUaTWIg JO} suNETD poaoiddy Aed [[eys JowsIUUpyY jUsUATIEg 3}\n\u201cQuourted pieme soLalas pur \u2018s]soo pur sagq sAsUIONE \u2018S]sO9 UOTRSTULUpE\npuke sorjoUu Jaye) pun JUSUETEg Jen OY} Spasoxe suTe[O paaosddy jo\nJUNO UE [2]O} 3Y} WVU JUI.Ad st] UT \u2018perNba1 st uoTjeJUsUMIOp ou yng \u201cUIIOY\nWIB[9 PITBA & IIWIQNS JsNUT SIOq UID; SsE[D \u2018UsULARg Yse_ SANBUIAITY ot}\nDAIINI OJ, TUSWARY YSED SANBUIATY COOLS B JO} WETS B ayBUT 0} JOITS\nUBD SIOg USP SSE[D \u201cBULIOWTUOPY J1PaID Jo \u201coUIT], SOT \u2018Sasso\u2019T Jayoog-Jo\nNO Jo} uoEsuad MOD 0} sABUIAT[e sy} UT \u2018soURMSUT YoU) AW UApT UT\nUOTT[IM [\u00a2 PUB SOOTAIOS UOTBIOYsaI AyyUSpI Suipnjoul\u2014 uoTuNsuRI], pue\n\u2018xejinby \u2018uetiadxy Aq paptaoid saotalag SULIOWUOP WIPeIO neeing-seIy\nJo sieak (\u00a2) dary} (\u00a2\u20ac) pue \u201c(sasso\u2019] Jay90g-Jo-nEO Joy deo go O00'T$ BU\n0} yalqns) juaproul ay) Jo says oy} Sunesnrur yueds sum 30y \u2018(deo\nOPT$) INOU/OO OFF 18 \u201cQUIT, SO\u2019T Jo sInoy (9) xIs 0} dn Joy uoTesuaduICD\n(Z) quaprouy AYLMIEg BIC] SY} JO I[Nsal eB se paLMoUT Sasso] ATBJUOUL\npesing wei Joy \u2018uoNeyUauMoop Burjioddns pue umeyo B Jo uoTsstuqns\nuodn \u2018uosiad tad goa\u2018Z$ Jo [elo] B 0 dn \u2018sasso'T yeyoog-Jo-3noO Joy\nuotesusdutos (1) :pung JUIWIETNES OOOO6P$ SU] Wor Jotpor SULMOTIOY\nBY] SATSOOI 0} O|QIBI[S Ie SIOQUIDP| SSEIO \u201cAT[BIOUSD \u2018s[IeJeP [TN] Joy\n\u201cW0d UIWAaT}AgUVQeuedo1gaPPCVUULY MMA JE OIQE[IBAR JUSUID.IBY\nJUIWITHOS oY] 998 sseVo[q ZIPIACA JUIWIT}I9g ay) seop Wey AA\n\n\u2018spool 1sinduoo s,juepuayeq, Aq peuuyuos sev\n\nJuaprouy Aynoasg eye] sy} UI pastwioiduos ATTeUS}od sem Jey} YO MjoU\nJopue suzaisAs Ioynduioo sjuBpUsjac] UO PsUTeIUIBUI se UOTJULIOJUT\nSIVALIY OSOYM STENPTAIPUL [[Y \u2018SOPNPUI sse[O sy], gpapnypouy st oA,\n\u2018g[BUUTg Jo saako[duia IauLIO] pue quar Jo\n\n( UONRULIOJUT aBALLY,,) SIaqumnu AyLINoag [eIO0g pur \u2018sassoippe \u2018soureu\npe}oeparun pue paydArousun Surpnjout \u2018uiaysAs Iajnd woo s quepuayacy UO\npeloys UOTeULIOJUT passacoe ATTetUs}od Jo passaooe Ayred paztouneun\nUe USM \u201cTZOT \u201cp Jaquissaq, Ajaye urxoidde uo pazmooso yey} (,juaplouy\nAYLIMIaG eyeCZ,, SY) WaysAs J SU Jo Yowarg Apnoas v pue (, JuUBpUdzacq,,)\nOTT suedorg spoeuUly SUTUIS.UOO JINSME] UOTIOB SsETO B UL palpoRal UsAq\nsey quaunmnas y \u2018THNOD AHL WOU TOVSSAIT INVLNOdNT\n\fPage 17 of 25 PagelD 579\n\nFiled 11/04/24\n\nCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2\n\ndpordIVG YAVU JOU OP Isvo|[_ :9dIAIIG [vISOg\n\n\u201c890S-OTF-LL8-T 991J-]19} [[e9 10\nWOd JUIUIIT IG LIL oULdO.L {oP CUUT MAM\nJISIA \u201cUONVULIOJUT I10UL .10,,\n\nuaAMD] D MOL UOLDULIYOS DP 40\nquaulasijdaapp up \u2018pious yunf JOU SI SIYT.\n\n\u2018OOUON Stu}\npazloyiny spxay, JO JANOD JOLMISIC. \u00a5\n\n\u2018JUSUISTHES UOT}OR sseIo\nB WO s}yoUEq 0} payyjua oq Avw NOK \u201cE707\nsung ul QT] \u2018euedorg sjovuurg Aq pesoyposip\njuaprouy AqLnosg eyed ey) Ut pesturoidutos\nSeM UOTJVULOJUI [euosied INOA JT\n\nUOISIAIC] Se ye]\n\n\u2018SUXO], JO JOINSIC] WIOYWION st} Joy yNeg\nPUISIC, SAILS PSU] \u201cGSE [ASET-\u20ac \u201cON ase\nOTT aundoig ajovuuig uojyty\n\n6007-LLESS NW \u201cUesseyuryD\n6002 X\u00b0 \u201cOd\n\nITI sunnsuog sondjeuy 0/9\njuauapyay ojo\u201d, aupdodg ajoouulg\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page18of25 PagelD 580\n\nEXHIBIT C\n\fa Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page19o0f25 PagelD 581 a\nFitton v. Pinnacle Propane, LLC, Case No. 3:23cv1559,\nUnited States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division\n\nPinnacle Propane Data Settlement\nc/o Analytics Consulting LLC\nP.O. Box 2009\nChanhassen, MN 55317-2009\n\nUSE THIS CLAIM FORM TO MAKE A CLAIM FOR UNREIMBURSED OUT-OF-POCKET LOSSES,\nCREDIT MONITORING SERVICES OR ALTERNATIVE CASH PAYMENT\n\nSETTLEMENT CLAIM FORM\n\nIN ORDER TO BE VALID, THIS CLAIM FORM MUST BE POSTMARKED OR SUBMITTED ONLINE AT\nWWW.PINNACLEPROPANEDATASETTLEMENT.COM NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 13, 2024.\n\nATTENTION: This Claim Form is to be used to apply for benefits related to the Data Incident that occurred on approximately\nDecember 4, 2022, and potentially affected individuals to whom Pinnacle Propane, LLC (\u201cDefendant\u201d) sent notice. There are four\n(4) types of benefits for which Settlement Class Members may be eligible: (1) compensation for Unreimbursed Out-of-Pocket\nlosses incurred as a result of the Data Incident, up to a total of $2,000 per person upon submission of a valid claim and supporting\ndocumentation,; (2) compensation for up to six (6) hours of Lost Time, at $40.00/hour ($240 cap), for time spent mitigating the\neffects of the Data Incident-Claims for Lost Time can be combined with claims for Unreimbursed Economic Loss but are subject\nto the $2,000.00 cap; and (3) three (3) years of three-bureau Credit Monitoring Services provided by Experian, Equifax, and\nTransunion - these services include identity restoration services and $1 million in identity theft insurance. (4) In the alternative to\ncompensation for Unreimbursed Out-of-Pocket Losses, Lost Time, and/or Credit Monitoring, Class Members can elect to make\na claim for up to a $100 Alternative Cash Payment. To receive this benefit, Settlement Class Members must submit a signed,\nvalid claim form, but no additional documentation is required to make a claim. In the event that the total amount of Approved\nClaims exceeds the amount of the Net Settlement Fund, then the cash Settlement Payments to be paid for Approved Claims for\nUnreimbursed Out-of-Pocket Losses, Lost Time, or the Alternative Cash Payment shall be proportionately reduced on a pro rata\nbasis and paid in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement.\n\nTo submit a claim, you must be a Settlement Class Member whose Private Information was potentially compromised in the Data\nIncident and/or received Notice of this settlement with a Unique ID and PIN.\n\nPlease be advised that any supporting documentation that you would like to provide must be submitted with this Claim Form.\n\nCLAIM VERIFICATION: All claims are subject to verification. You will be notified if additional information is needed to verify\nyour claim.\n\nASSISTANCE: If you have questions about this Claim Form, please visit the Settlement Website at\nwww.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com for additional information.\n\nPLEASE KEEP A COPY OF YOUR CLAIM FORM, SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION,\nAND PROOF OF MAILING FOR YOUR RECORDS.\n\nFailure to submit required documentation, or to complete all parts of the Claim Form, may result in\ndenial of the claim, delay its processing, or otherwise adversely affect the claim.\n\n[| 1 [| [|\n\fa Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page20of25 PagelD 582 a\n\nREGISTRATION\n\nFirst Name M.I. Last Name\n\nLITITITTTTT Tt ittt) F) CLEEIT TT ttt ttt tt ttt)\n\nMailing Address\n\nCity State Zip Code\n\nTelephone Number\n\nEmail Address\n\nPlease provide the Unique ID identified on the Notice that was sent to you:\nLITT ttt |\n\nInstructions. Please follow the instructions below and answer the questions as instructed.\n\nCLAIM INFORMATION\n\nSection A. Confirm Your Eligibility\n\nWas your Personally Identifiable Information (\u201cPII\u201d) compromised or potentially compromised in the Data Incident\ndisclosed by Pinnacle Propane LLC, beginning in June 2023 or did you receive a Notice with a Unique ID indicating that\nyou may be a member of the Class?\n\n[] YEs [] No\n\nIf yes, continue to the next question. If no, you are not a member of the Class and do not qualify to file a claim.\n\nDid you incur financial expenses, suffer any other financial losses, or spend time remedying issues as a result of the Data\nIncident disclosed by Propane LLC beginning in June 2023? For example, did you sign up and pay for a credit monitoring\nservice, hire and pay for a professional service to remedy identity theft, etc., or did you spend time monitoring credit,\nresolving disputes for unauthorized transactions, freezing or unfreezing your credit, remedying a falsified tax return, etc.\nas a result of the Data Incident?\n\n[] YEs [] no\n\nIf yes, you may be eligible to fill out Section B of this form and provide corroborating documentation. If no, you are still\neligible to fill out Section C or Section D of this form.\n\nSection B. Reimbursement for Out-of-Pocket Losses\n\nIf you suffered verifiable financial losses as a result of the Data Incident, you may be eligible to receive a payment to compensate\nyou for these financial losses and lost time spent.\n\nIf it is verified that you meet all the criteria described in the Settlement Agreement, and you submit documentation that proves\nyour losses and the dollar amount of those losses, you are eligible to receive a payment compensating you for your documented\nOut-of-Pocket Losses of up to $2,000 per person. Out-of-Pocket Losses includes costs incurred on or after December 4, 2022,\nincluding: (1) costs associated with accessing or freezing/unfreezing credit reports with any credit reporting agency; (2) other\nmiscellaneous expenses incurred related to any Unreimbursed Economic Losses such as notary, fax, postage, copying, mileage,\nand long-distance telephone charges; (3) credit monitoring or other mitigative costs.\n\nClass Members who elect to submit a claim for compensation of Out-of-Pocket Losses must provide the Settlement Administrator\nwith information required to evaluate the claim, including:(1) the Class Member\u2019s name and current address; (2) documentation\n\n[| 2 [| [|\n\fa Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page21of25 PagelD 583 a\n\nsupporting their claim; (3) a brief description of the documentation describing the nature of the loss, if the nature of the loss is\nnot apparent from the documentation alone; and (4) a verification, stating that the claim is true and correct, to the best of the\nClass Member\u2019s knowledge and belief, and is being made under penalty of perjury. Documentation supporting Out-of-Pocket\nLosses can include receipts or other documentation not \u201cself-prepared\u201d by the Class Member that documents the costs incurred.\n\u201cSelf-prepared\u201d documents such as handwritten receipts are, by themselves, insufficient to receive reimbursement, but can be\nconsidered to add clarity to or support other submitted documentation.\n\nProviding adequate proof of your losses does not guarantee that you will be entitled to receive the full amount claimed. All claims\nwill also be subject to an aggregate maximum payment amount, as explained in the Settlement Agreement. If fhe amount of losses\nclaimed exceeds the maximum amount of money available under the Settlement Agreement, then the payment for your claim will\nbe reduced on a pro rata basis. If you would like to learn more, please review the Settlement Agreement for further details.\n\nFor each loss that you believe was incurred as a result of the Data Incident, please provide a description of the loss, the date of\nthe loss, the dollar amount of the loss, and all documentation that supports the loss. You must provide ALL required information\nfor this claim to be processed. Supporting documents must be submitted with this Claim Form.\n\nr claim. Please provide\nonly copies of your supporting documents and keep all originals for your personal files. The Settlement Administrator will have no\nobligation to return any supporting documentation to you. A copy of the Settlement Administrator\u2019s privacy policy is available at\nhttps://Awww.analyticsllc.com/privacy-statement/. Please do not directly communicate with Defendant regarding this matter. All\ninquiries are to be sent to the Settlement Administrator.\n\nDY =t-Ye1 | eli(elameumedele) rela ilare|\n\nDY =S-felg | e)i(e)a me) mitt=m mort) DY =} k= Ko) iy eo}-1-) viel vial! Deen\nExample: lol7| |1{7} [2fo] | | ]5]o] [o]o] | Cony of identity theft protection\nIdentity Theft Protection Service MM DD YY service bill\nFoes paid to a professional to | 0 | 2 | | 3 | 0 | | 2 | 1 | | | | 2 | 5 | | 0 | 0 | Copy of i professional\nremedy a falsified tax return MM DD Y Y Services 0\n\n(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)\n\n[| 3 [| [|\n\fa Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page22of25 PagelD 584 a\n\nDY =t-Ye1 | eli(elameumedele) rela ilare|\nDrorerVait=Van etic) a\n\nDY =S-fe1g| o)i(e)a me) mitt=m moy-t) DY =} k= Ko) iy eo}-1-) vite) vial!\n\nReimbursement for Lost Time:\n\nClass Members may submit a claim for up to six (6) hours of time spent remedying issues related to the Data Incident. Six (6)\nhours of lost time may be reimbursed at $40 per hour ($240 cap) if you provide an attestation as to the time you spent remedying\nissues related to the Data Incident. Examples of lost time spent remedying issues related to the Data Incident may include time\nspent remedying identity theft, fraud, misuse of private information, credit monitoring, or freezing credit reports.\n\nIf you spent time remedying issues related to the Data Incident, please list the number of hours you spent here:\n\nC] By checking this box, | declare that the information provided in this Claim Form to support my seeking relief for Lost\nTime is true and correct.\n\nSection C. Credit Monitoring Services\n\nClass Members are eligible to enroll in three (3) years of three-bureau Credit Monitoring Services provided by Experian,\nEquifax, and Transunion - these services include identity restoration services and $1 million in identity theft insurance.\n\nBy checking the below box, | choose to enroll in Credit Monitoring Services.\n\nCT] Yes, | choose to enroll in Credit Monitoring Services.\nSection D. $100 Cash Compensation - Alternative Cash Payment\n\nClass Members may, in lieu of making a claim for reimbursement of Out-of-Pocket Losses, Lost Time, and Credit Monitoring, elect\nto receive an alternative cash payment in an amount up to one hundred dollars ($100) on a claims-made basis.\n\nBy checking the below box, | choose to receive a cash payment of up to $100 in the alternative to compensation for Out-\nof-Pocket Losses, Lost Time, and Credit Monitoring Services.\n\nNOTE: YOU MAY NOT SEEK BENEFITS FOR OUT-OF-POCKET LOSSES, LOST TIME, OR CREDIT MONITORING SERVICES\nIF YOU ARE FILING FOR THE ALTERNATIVE CASH PAYMENT IN THIS SECTION.\n\nC] Yes, | choose a cash payment of up to $100 in the alternative to compensation for Out-of-Pocket Losses, Lost Time,\nand Credit Monitoring Services.\n\nSection E. Class Member Affirmation\n\nBy submitting this Claim Form, | certify that | am eligible to make a claim in this settlement and that the information\nprovided in this Claim Form and any attachments are true and correct. | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws\nof the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. | understand that this claim may be subject to\naudit, verification, and Court review and that the Settlement Administrator may require supplementation of this Claim\nor additional information from me. | also understand that all claim payments are subject to the availability of settlement\nfunds and may be reduced in part or in whole, depending on the type of claim and the determinations of the Settlement\nAdministrator.\n\nMM DD YY YY\n\nSignature Date\n\nPrinted Name\n\nIN ORDER TO BE VALID, THIS CLAIM FORM MUST BE POSTMARKED OR SUBMITTED ONLINE AT\nWWW.PINNACLEPROPANEDATASETTLEMENT.COM NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 13, 2024\n\nQuestions? Go to\na 4 a www.PinnaclePropaneDataSettlement.com a\nor call 1-877-410-5068\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2 Filed 11/04/24 Page23o0f25 PagelD 585\n\nEXHIBIT D\n\fPage 24o0f 25 PagelD 586\n\nFiled 11/04/24\n\nCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2\n\n\u20188908-01 P-LL8-1 J 99dF [[O}\nsuoydaya} Aq 10 WOd IOJeIISTUTIPRIOTIOUM)JUSWIOTHOSeIEqouedo1gopoeuUrg ye [reurs Aq\nJOJISIUIWIPY JUIWII[}}9g Oy) 1OR]UOS osvo|d \u2018ooURIsISSR pooU JO suOT}soNb savy NOA J]\n\n\u201cOUITUO WIRD INOA jugs NOA yey}\npopuoumosal SI 7 \u2018((UOTeJUSUNOOp pue UOT}eULIOJU [eUOKIppe sormnbar yoIyM) sosuadxa\nJO SOSSOT 1Ox90d-JO-jno JO JUIWOSINQUIIOI dy} JOJ Jsonbor e sopnyoul wIe[d IMOA JT\n\n\u201cTHO JUOMIOTHOS ee oucdol qopoeuulg MMA :OUISGOM JUSTUOT}IOS\nOY} Je OUT[UO WILT & JWUIQNs JO [reU \u201cS'-) AQ WOT WIR] poyoyduroo & UINJor UD NOX\n\n\u2018PZOZ \u2018ET WAAINADAA WFO 10 uO poyreuysod 10 oulpuo\nPOATOdOI 9q ISN SWIO WIe[D [[V \u201cW0,7 WIe[D e WuIqns pue 9}9]duWI09 Jsnu Nod 4JYyoUNq\nyuUOUTOTIIOS & IOF ATTEND OT, \u201cWIOT UNTeTD & poyTugns JA JOU SAY NOA OJLOIPUL SPIODOI\nINQ \u2018voTe pouodes-saoge oy) 1OF predjsog DONON & poyrew A[snorAcid 19M NOX\n\n(*XOL \u201cC'N) 6SST-A9-\u20ac7\u00b0\u20ac \u201cON ASB)\nQT] \u2018auvdosg ajavuuig a uoynyy\n\fPage 250f25 PagelD 587\n\nFiled 11/04/24\n\nCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-2\n\n600Z-LIESS NW \u201cUassequeyD\n\n6007 XO \u201cOd\n\nOTI Bunnsuog sonAjeuy o/o\nqUIWDTIJIG vLGg sUuLdoIg sPLvUuUlg\n","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-03-11T18:42:36.866497-07:00","document_number":"29","attachment_number":2,"pacer_doc_id":"177017244096","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Declaration(s) of Settlement Administrator Regarding Notice","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747598/","id":422747598,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/29/3/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:51.082693-08:00","date_modified":"2026-03-12T07:31:12.442277-07:00","sha1":"785ffa32ed86c9d60fe2088d10874786139466b4","page_count":12,"file_size":458323,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.29.3.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.29.3.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 1 of 12 PageID 588\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nAMANDA FITTON, on behalf of herself and\nall others similarly situated, Case No. 3:23cv1559\n\n Plaintiff,\n\nv.\n\nPINNACLE PROPANE, LLC,\n\n Defendant.\n\n\n [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF\u2019S UNOPPOSED\n MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT\n\n Before the Court is Plaintiff Amanda Fitton\u2019s (\u201cPlaintiff\u201d) Motion for Final Approval of\n\nClass Action Settlement (\u201cMotion for Final Approval\u201d). The Motion seeks approval of the\n\nSettlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate. Also before the Court is Plaintiff\u2019s Motion for\n\nAttorneys\u2019 Fees, Costs, and Expenses to Settlement Class Counsel, and Service Award Payment\n\nto Plaintiff (\u201cMotion for Attorneys\u2019 Fees\u201d).\n\n Having reviewed and considered the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement between\n\nPlaintiff and Defendant Pinnacle Propane, LLC (\u201cPinnacle,\u201d and together with Plaintiff, the\n\n\u201cParties\u201d) (the \u201cSettlement Agreement\u201d), Motion for Final Approval, and Motion for Attorneys\u2019\n\nFees, and having conducted a Final Approval Hearing, the Court makes the findings and grants\n\nthe relief set forth below approving the Settlement upon the terms and conditions set forth in this\n\nOrder.\n\n WHEREAS, on June 26, 2024, the Court entered an Order Granting Preliminary Approval\n\nof Class Action Settlement (\u201cPreliminary Approval Order\u201d) (Doc. No. 26) which, among other\n\nthings: (a) conditionally certified this matter as a class action for purposes of the Settlement,\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 2 of 12 PageID 589\n\n\n\n(b) appointed Plaintiff as the Settlement Class Representative and appointed Raina Borrelli of\n\nthe law firm Strauss Borrelli PLLC as Settlement Class Counsel; (c) preliminarily approved the\n\nSettlement Agreement; (d) approved the form and manner of Notice to the Settlement Class; (d)\n\nset deadlines for opt-outs and objections; (e) approved and appointed the Settlement\n\nAdministrator; and (f) set the date for the Final Approval Hearing;\n\n WHEREAS, pursuant to the Notice requirements set forth in the Settlement Agreement\n\nand in the Preliminary Approval Order, the Settlement Class was notified of the terms of the\n\nproposed Settlement Agreement, of the right of Settlement Class Members to opt out, and the right\n\nof Settlement Class Members to object to the Settlement Agreement and to be heard at a Final\n\nApproval Hearing;\n\n WHEREAS, on December 3, 2024, the Court held a Final Approval Hearing to determine,\n\ninter alia: (1) whether the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement are fair, reasonable,\n\nand adequate for the release of the claims contemplated by the Settlement Agreement; and\n\n(2) whether judgment should be entered dismissing this action with prejudice;\n\n WHEREAS, the Court has (i) given an opportunity to be heard to all Settlement Class\n\nMembers in accordance with the Preliminary Approval Order; (ii) reviewed the submissions\n\npresented with respect to the proposed Settlement Agreement; (ii) held the Final Approval\n\nHearing; (iv) determined that the Settlement Agreement is fair, adequate, and reasonable;\n\n(v) considered the application made by Settlement Class Counsel for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs,\n\nand expenses, and the application for a Service Award Payment to the Representative Plaintiff,\n\nand having reviewed the materials in support thereof, and good cause appearing:\n\n IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, DECREED, AND ADJUDGED AS FOLLOWS:\n\n 1. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and over all claims\n\n\n\n 2\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 3 of 12 PageID 590\n\n\n\nraised therein and all Parties thereto, including the Settlement Class.\n\n 2. The Settlement does not constitute an admission of liability by Pinnacle, and the\n\nCourt expressly does not make any finding of liability or wrongdoing by Pinnacle or any other\n\nPerson.\n\n 3. Unless otherwise indicated, terms in this Final Judgment and Order Approving\n\nClass Action Settlement (\u201cFinal Approval Order and Judgment\u201d) with initial capital letters have\n\nthe same meaning as set forth in the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 4. The Court, having reviewed the terms of the Settlement Agreement submitted by\n\nthe Parties pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (\u201cFRCP\u201d) Rule 23(e)(2), grants final\n\napproval of the Settlement, and for purposes of the Settlement and this Final Approval Order and\n\nJudgment only, the Court hereby finally certifies the Settlement Class.\n\n 5. The Settlement was entered into in good faith following arm\u2019s-length negotiations\n\nand is not collusive. The Settlement is in the best interests of the Settlement Class and is therefore\n\napproved. The Court finds that the Parties faced significant risks, expenses, delays, and\n\nuncertainties, including as to the outcome, including on appeal, of continued litigation of this\n\ncomplex matter, which further supports the Court\u2019s finding that the Settlement Agreement is fair,\n\nreasonable, adequate, and in the best interests of the Settlement Class Members. The Court finds\n\nthat the uncertainties of continued litigation in both the trial and appellate courts, as well as the\n\nexpense associated with it, weigh in favor of approval of the settlement reflected in the Settlement\n\nAgreement.\n\n 6. The Court affirms and incorporates herein by reference its preliminary conclusions\n\nas to the satisfaction of FRCP Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) set forth in the Preliminary Approval\n\nOrder and notes that because this certification of the Settlement Class is in connection with\n\n\n\n 3\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 4 of 12 PageID 591\n\n\n\nthe Settlement Agreement rather than litigation, the Court need not address any issues of\n\nmanageability that may be presented by certification of the Settlement Class proposed in the\n\nSettlement Agreement.\n\n 7. The terms of the Settlement Agreement are fair, reasonable, and adequate, and are\n\nhereby approved, adopted, and incorporated by the Court. Notice of the terms of the Settlement,\n\nthe rights of Settlement Class Members under the Settlement, the Final Approval Hearing,\n\nPlaintiff\u2019s application for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and expenses, and the Service Award Payment to\n\nthe Settlement Class Representative has been provided to Settlement Class Members as directed\n\nby this Court\u2019s Orders, and proof of Notice has been filed with the Court. Defendant has complied\n\nwith the requirements of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (\u201cCAFA\u201d), 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1715.\n\n 8. The Court finds that the Notice, set forth in the Settlement Agreement and\n\neffectuated pursuant to the Preliminary Approval Order, was the best notice practicable under the\n\ncircumstances, was reasonably calculated to provide and did provide due and sufficient notice to\n\nthe Settlement Class of the pendency of the Action, certification of the Settlement Class for\n\nsettlement purposes only, the existence and terms of the Settlement Agreement, and their right to\n\nobject and to appear at the final approval hearing or to exclude themselves from the Settlement\n\nAgreement, and satisfied the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the United\n\nStates Constitution, and other applicable law.\n\n 9. The Court finds that Defendant has fully complied with the notice requirements of\n\nthe Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1715.\n\n 10. As of the Opt-Out deadlineno potential Settlement Class Members have requested\n\nto be excluded from the Settlement. All Settlement Class Members who have not validly excluded\n\nthemselves from the Settlement Class are bound by this Final Approval Order and Judgment and\n\n\n\n 4\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 5 of 12 PageID 592\n\n\n\nthe Settlement Agreement.\n\n 11. All Settlement Class Members who have not objected to the Settlement Agreement\n\nin the manner provided in the Settlement Agreement are deemed to have waived any objections\n\nby appeal, collateral challenge, or otherwise.\n\n 12. The Court has considered all the documents filed in support of the Settlement, and\n\nhas fully considered all matters raised, all exhibits and affidavits filed, all evidence received at the\n\nFinal Approval Hearing, all other papers and documents comprising the record herein, and all oral\n\narguments presented to the Court.\n\n 13. The Parties, their respective attorneys, and the Settlement Administrator are hereby\n\ndirected to consummate the Settlement in accordance with this Final Approval Order and Judgment\n\nand the terms of the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 14. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, Pinnacle, the Settlement Administrator, and\n\nSettlement Class Counsel shall implement the Settlement in the manner and timeframe as set forth\n\nin the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 15. Within the time period set forth in the Settlement Agreement, the relief provided\n\nfor in the Settlement Agreement shall be made available to the various Settlement Class Members\n\nsubmitting valid Claim Forms, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 16. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, Plaintiff and the Settlement Class Members\n\nrelease claims against Defendant and all Released Persons, as defined in the Settlement\n\nAgreement, as follows:\n\n Upon Final Approval of this Settlement Agreement, Settlement Class members release, acquit, and\n forever discharge Pinnacle and all of its respective past, present, and future parent companies,\n partnerships, subsidiaries, affiliates, divisions, employees, servants, members, providers, partners,\n principals, directors, shareholders, and owners, and all of their respective attorneys, heirs,\n executors, administrators, insures, coinsurers, reinsurers, joint ventures, personal representatives,\n predecessors, successors, transferees, trustees, and assigns, and includes, without limitation, any\n Person related to any such entities who is, was, or could have been named as a defendant in the\n\n 5\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 6 of 12 PageID 593\n\n\n Action, as well as covered entities associated with the Data Incident(\u201cReleased Parties\u201d) from all\n liabilities, rights, claims, actions, causes of action, demands, damages, penalties, costs, attorneys\u2019\n fees, losses, and remedies, whether known or unknown, existing or potential, suspected or\n unsuspected, liquidated or unliquidated, legal, statutory, or equitable, that result from, arise out of,\n are based upon, or relate to any release of Private Information from the Data Incident, and conduct\n that was alleged or could have been alleged in the Litigation, including, without limitation, any\n claims, actions, causes of action, demands, damages, penalties, losses, or remedies relating to,\n based upon, resulting from, or arising out of the disclosure of Private Information from the Data\n Incident (the \u201cReleased Claims\u201d), provided that nothing in this Release is intended to, does or shall\n be deemed to release any claims not arising out of, based upon, resulting from, or related to the\n Data Incident.\n\n 17. Released Claims shall not include the right of any Settlement Class Member,\n\nPlaintiff\u2019s counsel, Settlement Class Counsel, or any of the Released Persons to enforce the terms\n\nof the Settlement contained in the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 18. Upon the Effective Date, and to the fullest extent permitted by law, each Settlement\n\nClass Member, including Plaintiff, shall, either directly, indirectly, representatively, as a member\n\nof or on behalf of the general public or in any capacity, be permanently barred and enjoined from\n\ncommencing, prosecuting, pursuing, or participating in any recovery in any action in this or any\n\nother forum (other than participation in the Settlement as provided in the Settlement Agreement)\n\nin which any of the Released Claims is asserted.\n\n 19. On the Effective Date and in consideration of the promises and covenants set forth\n\nin the Settlement Agreement, (i) Plaintiff and each Settlement Class Member, and each of their\n\nrespective spouses and children with claims on behalf of the Settlement Class Member, executors,\n\nrepresentatives, guardians, wards, heirs, estates, successors, predecessors, next friends, co-\n\nborrowers, co-obligors, co-debtors, legal representatives, attorneys, agents, and assigns, and all\n\nthose who claim through them or who assert claims (or could assert claims) on their behalf\n\n(including the government in the capacity as parens patriae or on behalf of creditors or estates of\n\nthe releasors), and each of them (collectively and individually, the \u201cReleasing Persons\u201d), and (ii)\n\nSettlement Class Counsel and each of their past and present law firms, partners, or other employers,\n\n 6\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 7 of 12 PageID 594\n\n\n\nemployees, agents, representatives, successors, or assigns will be deemed to have, and by operation\n\nof this Final Order and Judgment shall have, fully, finally, completely, and forever released and\n\ndischarged the Released Persons from the Released Claims. The release set forth in the preceding\n\nsentence (the \u201cRelease\u201d) shall be included as part of any judgment, so that all Released Claims\n\nshall be barred by principles of res judicata, collateral estoppel, and claim and issue preclusion.\n\n 20. Without in any way limiting the scope of the Release, the Release covers, without\n\nlimitation, any and all claims for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and expenses incurred by Settlement Class\n\nCounsel or any other counsel representing Plaintiff or Settlement Class Members, or any of them,\n\nin connection with or related in any manner to the Lawsuit, the Settlement, the administration of\n\nsuch Settlement and/or the Released Claims, as well as any and all claims for the Service Award\n\nto Plaintiff.\n\n 21. Subject to Court approval, as of the Effective Date, all Settlement Class Members\n\nshall be bound by the Settlement Agreement and the Release and all of their claims shall be\n\ndismissed with prejudice and released, irrespective of whether they received actual notice of the\n\nLawsuit or the Settlement.\n\n 22. As of the Effective Date, the Released Persons are deemed, by operation of the\n\nentry of this Final Order and Judgment, to have fully released and forever discharged Plaintiff, the\n\nSettlement Class Members, Settlement Class Counsel, or any other counsel representing Plaintiff\n\nor Settlement Class Members, or any of them, of and from any claims arising out of the Lawsuit\n\nor the Settlement. Any other claims or defenses Defendant or other Released Persons may have\n\nagainst Plaintiff, the Settlement Class Members, Settlement Class Counsel, or any other counsel\n\nrepresenting Plaintiff or Settlement Class Members, including, without limitation, any claims\n\nbased upon or arising out of any employment, debtor-creditor, contractual, or other business\n\n\n\n 7\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 8 of 12 PageID 595\n\n\n\nrelationship that are not based upon or do not arise out of the institution, prosecution, assertion,\n\nsettlement, or resolution of the Lawsuit or the Released Claims are not released, are specifically\n\npreserved, and shall not be affected by the preceding sentence.\n\n 23. As of the Effective Date, the Released Persons are deemed, by operation of entry\n\nof the Final Order and Judgment, to have fully released and forever discharged each other of and\n\nfrom any claims they may have against each other arising from the claims asserted in the Lawsuit,\n\nincluding any claims arising out of the investigation, defense, or Settlement of the Lawsuit.\n\n 24. The Court grants final approval to the appointment of Plaintiff Amanda Fitton as\n\nSettlement Class Representative. The Court concludes that the Settlement Class Representative\n\nhas fairly and adequately represented the Settlement Class and will continue to do so.\n\n 25. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, and in recognition of her efforts on behalf\n\nof the Settlement Class, the Court approves a payment to the Settlement Class Representative in\n\nthe amount of $5,000 as a Service Award Payment. Pinnacle shall make such payment in\n\naccordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 26. The Court grants final approval to the appointment of Raina Borrelli of the law firm\n\nStrauss Borrelli PLLC as Settlement Class Counsel. The Court concludes that Settlement Class\n\nCounsel has adequately represented the Settlement Class and will continue to do so.\n\n 27. The Court, after careful review of the fee petition filed by Settlement Class Counsel,\n\nand after applying the appropriate standards required by relevant case law, hereby grants\n\nSettlement Class Counsel\u2019s application for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, and expenses in the amount of\n\n$163,333.33 and reasonable costs and expenses of $18,668.33. Payment shall be made pursuant to\n\nthe terms of the Settlement Agreement.\n\n 28. This Final Approval Order and Judgment and the Settlement Agreement, and all\n\n\n\n 8\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 9 of 12 PageID 596\n\n\n\nacts, statements, documents, or proceedings relating to the Settlement Agreement are not, and shall\n\nnot be construed as, used as, or deemed to be evidence of, an admission by or against Pinnacle of\n\nany claim, any fact alleged in the Action, any fault, any wrongdoing, any violation of law, or any\n\nliability of any kind on the part of Pinnacle or of the validity or certifiability for litigation the\n\nSettlement Class or any claims that have been, or could have been, asserted in the Action. This\n\nFinal Approval Order and Judgment, the Settlement Agreement, and all acts, statements,\n\ndocuments, or proceedings relating to the Settlement Agreement shall not be offered or received\n\nor be admissible in evidence in any action or proceeding, nor shall they be used in any way as an\n\nadmission or concession or evidence of any liability or wrongdoing of any nature or that Plaintiff,\n\nany Settlement Class Member, or any other person has suffered any damage; provided, however,\n\nthat the Settlement Agreement and this Final Approval Order and Judgment may be filed in any\n\naction by Pinnacle, Settlement Class Counsel, or Settlement Class Members seeking to enforce the\n\nSettlement Agreement or the Final Approval Order and Judgment (including, but not limited to,\n\nenforcing the releases contained herein). The Settlement Agreement and Final Approval Order\n\nand Judgment shall not be construed or admissible as an admission by Pinnacle that Plaintiff\u2019s\n\nclaims or any similar claims are suitable for class treatment. The terms of the Settlement\n\nAgreement terms shall be forever binding on, and shall have maximum res judicata, collateral\n\nestoppel, and all other preclusive effect in, all pending and future lawsuits, claims, suits, demands,\n\npetitions, causes of action, or other proceedings as to Released Claims and other prohibitions set\n\nforth in this Final Approval Order and Judgment that are maintained by, or on behalf of, any\n\nSettlement Class Member or any other person subject to the provisions of this Final Approval\n\nOrder and Judgment.\n\n 29. If the Effective Date, as defined in the Settlement Agreement, does not occur\n\n\n\n 9\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 10 of 12 PageID 597\n\n\n\n for any reason, this Final Approval Order and Judgment and the Preliminary Approval Order shall\n\n be deemed vacated, and shall have no force and effect whatsoever; the Settlement Agreement shall\n\n be considered null and void; all of the Parties\u2019 obligations under the Settlement Agreement, the\n\n Preliminary Approval Order, and this Final Approval Order and Judgment and the terms and\n\n provisions of the Settlement Agreement shall have no further force and effect with respect to the\n\n Parties and shall not be used in the Action or in any other proceeding for any purpose, and any\n\n judgment or order entered by the Court in accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement\n\n shall be treated as vacated nunc pro tunc, and the Parties shall be restored to their respective\n\n positions in the Action, as if the Parties never entered into the Settlement Agreement (without\n\n prejudice to any of the Parties\u2019 respective positions on the issue of class certification or any other\n\n issue). In such event, the Parties will jointly request that all scheduled deadlines be reasonably\n\n extended by the Court so as to avoid prejudice to any Party or Party\u2019s counsel. Further, in such\n\n event, Pinnacle will provide compensation to the Settlement Administrator for any amounts\n\n already incurred by the Settlement Administrator for costs of notice to the Settlement Class and\n\n Settlement administration, and will not, at any time, seek recovery of same from any other Party\n\n to the Action or from counsel to any other Party to the Litigation.\n\n 30. Pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1651, this Court shall retain the authority\n\n to issue any order necessary to protect its jurisdiction from any action, whether in state or federal\n\n court.\n\n 31. Without affecting the finality of this Final Approval Order and Judgment, the Court\n\n will retain jurisdiction over the subject matter and the Parties with respect to the interpretation and\n\n implementation of the Settlement Agreement for all purposes.\n\n 32. This Order resolves all claims against all Parties in this action and is a final order.\n\n\n\n 10\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 11 of 12 PageID 598\n\n\n\n 33. The Action is hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs except as provided\n\n in the Settlement Agreement.\n\n\n\n IT IS SO ORDERED this ______________ day of ______________, 2024.\n\n\n\n _______________________________\n Hon. Jane J. Boyle\n\n\n\n\n 11\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 29-3 Filed 11/04/24 Page 12 of 12 PageID 599\n\f","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-03-11T18:42:32.812024-07:00","document_number":"29","attachment_number":3,"pacer_doc_id":"177017244097","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Proposed Order Granting Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.020424-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.024561-08:00","date_filed":"2024-11-04","time_filed":null,"entry_number":29,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-11-04.001","pacer_sequence_number":75,"description":"MOTION Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement filed by Amanda Fitton (Attachments: # 1 Plaintiff's Memorandum in Support of Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement, # 2 Declaration(s) of Settlement Administrator Regarding Notice, # 3 Proposed Order Granting Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement) (Borrelli, Raina) (Entered: 11/04/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115636/","id":410115636,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747590/","id":422747590,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/28/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.000410-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:07.010369-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"28","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177017235452","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.937393-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.948790-08:00","date_filed":"2024-10-30","time_filed":null,"entry_number":28,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-10-30.001","pacer_sequence_number":73,"description":"MOTION for Attorney Fees, Costs, and Service Awards filed by Amanda Fitton with Brief/Memorandum in Support. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Motion to Approve Attorney's Fees, Costs, and Service Award, # 2 Declaration(s) of Raina C. Borrelli in Support of Plaintiff's Motion to Approve Attorney's Fees, Costs, and Service Award, # 3 Declaration(s) of Amanda Fitton in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Award of Attorney's Fees, Reimbursement of Expenses, and Service Awards to Class Representative, # 4 Proposed Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees, Costs, and Service Awards) (Borrelli, Raina) (Entered: 10/30/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115635/","id":410115635,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747589/","id":422747589,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/25/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.785861-08:00","date_modified":"2026-03-12T07:31:09.539931-07:00","sha1":"d5313d3798e9763dc5ce2103cb9d8c44d3c8e605","page_count":6,"file_size":161105,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.25.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.25.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 25 Filed 06/21/24 Page 1 of 6 PageID 409\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nAMANDA FITTON, on behalf of herself and\nall others similarly situated, Case No. 3:23-cv-01559-B\n\n Plaintiff,\n\nv.\n\nPINNACLE PROPANE, LLC,\n\n Defendant.\n\n\n SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF RAINA BORRELLI IN SUPPORT OF\n PLAINTIFF\u2019S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR\n PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS SETTLEMENT\n\n I, Raina Borrelli, being competent to testify, make the following declaration based on my\n\npersonal knowledge.\n\n 1. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice law in the State of Minnesota and am a\n\npartner at Strauss Borrelli PLLC. I am Counsel for Plaintiff and the proposed Settlement Class in\n\nthe above-captioned action (the \u201cAction\u201d). I submit this supplemental declaration in support of\n\nPlaintiff\u2019s Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Settlement in response to the\n\nCourt\u2019s request at the June 18, 2024, hearing on Plaintiff\u2019s Motion. Doc. 23.\n\n 2. At the June 18, hearing, the Court requested that Plaintiff\u2019s counsel provide detailed\n\ntime records in support of the attorney\u2019s fee contemplated by the proposed Settlement.\n\n 3. At this preliminary approval stage, the settling parties bear the burden of\n\ndemonstrating that the settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. See In re Cirrus Logic, Inc.,\n\nNo. A-07-CA-212-SS, 2009 WL 10670041, at *6 (W.D. Tex. Jan. 8, 2009); In re Chinese-\n\nManufactured Drywall Prods. Liab. Litig., No. 11-CV-1363, 2012 WL 92498, at *7 (E.D. La. Jan.\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 25 Filed 06/21/24 Page 2 of 6 PageID 410\n\n\n\n10, 2012). However, at preliminary approval, the standard is not as stringent as that applied to a\n\nmotion for final approval. See In re Pool Prods. Distrib. Market Antitrust Litig., 310 F.R.D. 300,\n\n314 (E.D. La. 2015) (citing Karvaly v. eBay, Inc., 245 F.R.D. 71, 86 (E.D.N.Y. 2007)). \u201cIf the\n\nproposed settlement discloses no reason to doubt its fairness, has no obvious deficiencies, does not\n\nimproperly grant preferential treatment to class representatives or segments of the class, does not\n\ngrant excessive compensation to attorneys, and appears to fall within the range of possible\n\napproval, the court should grant preliminary approval.\u201d In re Pool Prods., 310 F.R.D. at 314-315.\n\nPlaintiff\u2019s counsel believes that the Settlement, including the proposed fee request (which will be\n\nformally made via motion consistent with the Settlement Agreement), satisfies this standard.\n\n 4. Consistent with the Settlement Agreement, Plaintiff will file a motion for approval\n\nof her requested attorney\u2019s fees, costs, and Plaintiff\u2019s service award by 14 days ahead of the opt-\n\nout and objection deadline. That motion, which the Court will consider at the time it considers a\n\nmotion for final approval of the settlement, will detail the basis for Plaintiff\u2019s request of attorney\u2019s\n\nfees and costs\n\n 5. Through June 20, 2024, Plaintiff\u2019s counsel has spent 95.6 hours on the litigation\n\ntotaling $61,637.50 in lodestar. This lodestar contemplates activities undertaken to date, including\n\ninitial case investigation, researching and drafting the Complaint, review and analysis of\n\nDefendant\u2019s motion to dismiss, preparation for mediation including reviewing Defendant\u2019s\n\ninformal discovery responses and drafting a mediation statement, attending mediation, negotiating\n\nand drafting the Settlement Agreement, researching and drafting the motion for preliminary\n\napproval, and preparing for and attending the preliminary approval hearing.\n\n 6. Moreover, there is a substantial amount of work yet to be done by Plaintiff\u2019s\n\ncounsel before this case is concluded. Once preliminary approval is granted, Plaintiff\u2019s counsel\n\n\n\n\n 2\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 25 Filed 06/21/24 Page 3 of 6 PageID 411\n\n\n\nwill work with the Settlement Administrator to effectuate notice and to facilitate the claims process\n\n(including addressing any questions from Settlement Class member). Additionally, and consistent\n\nwith the Settlement Agreement and Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e), Plaintiff\u2019s counsel will research and draft\n\na motion for approval of their requested attorney\u2019s fees, costs and Plaintiff service award as well\n\nas a motion for final approval of the Settlement. Finally, Plaintiff\u2019s counsel will prepare for and\n\nattend the final approval hearing. These are important and time-consuming steps required by the\n\nclass settlement approval process that have yet to take place and will result in significant additional\n\ntime and lodestar for Plaintiff\u2019s counsel before this case is concluded. Plaintiff\u2019s counsel expects\n\nthat, conservatively, this will add at least $25,000.00 in additional lodestar to what has been\n\naccrued to date, which would result in a modest lodestar multiplier of approximately 2.0. Such a\n\nmodest multiplier has been consistently recognized as reasonable by courts in the Fifth Circuit.\n\nIndeed, multipliers of 1 to 4 are \u201ctypically approved by courts within [the Fifth] circuit.\u201d Burford\n\nv. Cargill, Inc., No. 05- 0283, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161232, at *6 n. 1 (W.D. La. Nov. 8, 2012);\n\nDi Giacomo v. Plains All Am. Pipeline, No. Civ.A. H-99-4137, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25532 at\n\n*11 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 19, 2001) (stating same and approving 5.3 multiplier).\n\n 7. The breakdown of time spent by each Plaintiff\u2019s counsel firm is laid out below.\n\nAttached hereto as Exhibit A, are Strauss Borrelli\u2019s detailed time records in this matter through\n\nJune 20, 2024. Attached hereto as Exhibit B are Kendall Law Group\u2019s detailed time records in\n\nthis matter through June 20, 2024.\n\n 8. A summary indicating the amount of time expended by the partners, associates, and\n\nprofessional support staff of Plaintiff\u2019s Counsel as of June 20, 2024, is set forth below:\n\n\n\n\n 3\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 25 Filed 06/21/24 Page 4 of 6 PageID 412\n\n\n\nStrauss Borrelli\n\n Timekeeper Rate Hours Amount\n Samuel J. Strauss (Partner) $700.00 17.1 $11,970.00\n Raina C. Borrelli (Partner) $700.00 49.9 $34,930.00\n Zog Begolli (Associate) $425.00 0.2 $85.00\n Carolyn Chen (Associate) $400.00 15.0 $6,000.00\n Michael Oellerich (Associate) $450.00 2.0 $900.00\n Rachel Pollack (Legal Assistant) $225.00 0.3 $67.50\n Lizzy Addell (Legal Assistant) $150.00 1.0 $150.00\n Ahleea Zama (Legal Assistant) $150.00 1.5 $225.00\n TOTAL 87.0 $54,327.50\n\n\nKendall Law Group\n\n Timekeeper Rate Hours Total\n Joe Kendall (Partner) $850.00 8.6 $7,310.00\n\n\n 9. In my opinion and experience, this time was reasonably and justifiably incurred.\n\n 10. Class Counsels\u2019 hourly rates, as set forth in the Lodestar Summary above, are\n\nreasonable, appropriate and consistent with the rates charged for legal services in similar complex\n\nclass action litigation such as this one. Class Counsel has confirmed that their hourly rates as\n\nadjusted for inflation have been accepted by state and federal courts for purposes of lodestar\n\ndeterminations and for purposes of lodestar cross-checks in other recent class action cases.\n\n I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that\n\nthe foregoing is true and correct.\n\n Executed this 21st day of June, 2024, at Eagan, Minnesota.\n\n\n By: /s/ Raina C. Borrelli\n Raina C. Borrelli\n STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC\n 980 Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610\n\n\n 4\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 25 Filed 06/21/24 Page 5 of 6 PageID 413\n\n\n\n Chicago, Illinois 60611\n Telephone: (872) 263-1100\n Facsimile: (872) 263-1109\n raina@straussborrelli.com\n\n\n\n\n 5\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 25 Filed 06/21/24 Page 6 of 6 PageID 414\n\n\n\n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n I, Raina C. Borrelli, hereby certify that on June 21, 2024, I electronically filed the foregoing\n\nwith the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing\n\nto counsel of record, below, via the ECF system.\n\nDATED this 21st day of June, 2024.\n\n\n TURKE & STRAUSS LLP\n\n By: /s/ Raina C. Borrelli\n Raina C. Borrelli\n STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC\n 980 Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610\n Chicago, Illinois 60611\n Telephone: (872) 263-1100\n Facsimile: (872) 263-1109\n raina@straussborrelli.com\n\n\n\n\n 6\n\f","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-03-11T18:42:32.776044-07:00","document_number":"25","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177016932349","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.765648-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.772238-08:00","date_filed":"2024-06-21","time_filed":null,"entry_number":25,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-06-21.002","pacer_sequence_number":65,"description":"AFFIDAVIT re 19 MOTION Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Settlement (Supplemental Declaration of Raina Borrelli in Support of Plaintiffs Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Settlement) by Amanda Fitton. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) A, # 2 Exhibit(s) B) (Borrelli, Raina) (Entered: 06/21/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115634/","id":410115634,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747588/","id":422747588,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/24/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.745720-08:00","date_modified":"2025-12-25T22:45:38.332739-08:00","sha1":"a35c4dc52e2c419edaccb382d726847bd978c6c1","page_count":4,"file_size":148586,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.24.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.24.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 24 Filed 06/21/24 Page 1 of 4 PageID 314\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nAMANDA FITTON, on behalf of herself and\nall others similarly situated, Case No. 3:23-cv-01559-B\n\n Plaintiff,\n\nv.\n\nPINNACLE PROPANE, LLC,\n\n Defendant.\n\n\n\n FIRST STIPULATION TO AMEND THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT\n This First Stipulation to Amend the Settlement Agreement (\u201cFirst Amendment\u201d is entered\ninto by and between Amanda Fitton (\u201cPlaintiff\u201d), individually and on behalf of the Settlement\nClass (as defined in Paragraph 56), and Pinnacle Propane, LLC (\u201cDefendant\u201d or \u201cPinnacle\u201d)\n(collectively the \u201cParties\u201d), in the action Fitton v. Pinnacle Propane, LLC, Case No. 3:23-cv-\n01559-B (the \u201cAction\u201d) pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of\nTexas (\u201cCourt\u201d), by and through their undersigned attorneys, subject to the approval of the Court.1\n\n\n RECITALS\n WHEREAS, the Parties entered into the Settlement Agreement, which Plaintiff filed with\nthe Court on February 16, 2024, in connection with Plaintiff\u2019s unopposed motion for preliminary\napproval of the Settlement Agreement;\n WHEREAS, on June 18, 2024, the Court held a hearing on Plaintiff\u2019s unopposed motion\nfor preliminary approval of the Settlement Agreement and directed the parties to address certain\nitems related to the Settlement Agreement;\n WHEREAS, in response to the Court\u2019s direction at the June 18, 2024, hearing, the Parties\nhave agreed to enter this First Amendment to clarify and modify the Settlement Agreement and\ncertain of its exhibits;\n\n\n\n\n 1\n The Settlement Agreement refers to the Settlement Agreement and Release in the Action.\nUnless otherwise defined herein, defined terms have the same meaning as in the Settlement\nAgreement.\n\n 1\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 24 Filed 06/21/24 Page 2 of 4 PageID 315\n\n\n\n NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree to amend the Settlement Agreement, subject to\nCourt approval, as follows:\n 1. Paragraph 15 of the Settlement Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:\n\n \u201cClaims Deadline\u201d shall mean the final date and time by which all Claim Forms must\n be postmarked (if mailed) or submitted (if filed electronically to the Settlement\n Website) in order to be considered timely and to be entitled to any of the settlement\n consideration contemplated by this Settlement Agreement for purposes of submitted\n valid Claims. The Claims Deadline shall be one hundred and thirty-five (135) days after\n the Notice Commencement Date. The Claims Deadline shall be clearly set forth in the\n Preliminary Approval Order, as well as in the Notice and the Claim Form.\n\n 2. Paragraph 39 of the Settlement Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:\n\n \u201cObjection Deadline\u201d means the date by which Settlement Class Members must\n submit electronically (if filed on Settlement Website) or postmark-required (if mailed)\n copies of any written objections, pursuant to the terms and conditions herein, to this\n Settlement Agreement and to any application and motion for the Fee Award and\n Expenses and Service Awards, which shall be one hundred and five (105) days after\n Notice Date, or such other date as ordered by the Court. This Deadline will also be\n known as the Objection Date.\n\n 3. Paragraph 40 of the Settlement Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:\n\n \u201cOpt-Out Deadline\u201d or \u201cExclusion Deadline\u201d is the last day on which a Settlement\n Class Member may submit electronically (if filed on Settlement Website) or postmark\n required (if mailed) a request to be excluded from the Settlement Class, which will be\n one hundred and five (105) days after the Notice Deadline. The deadline to file a\n Request for Exclusion will be clearly set forth in the Settlement Class Notice.\n\n 4. Paragraph 74 of the Settlement Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:\n\n Claims Deadline. All Settlement Class Members have one hundred and thirty-five\n (135) days after the Notice Date to make Claims for Settlement Benefits by submitting\n a Claim Form to the Settlement Administrator. The Claim Form must be postmarked\n or electronically submitted online within 135 days after the Notice Date. The Notice to\n the Settlement Class will specify this deadline and other relevant dates described\n herein. The Claim Form must be verified by the Settlement Class Member with a\n statement that his or her claim is true and correct to the best of his or her knowledge\n and belief and is being made under penalty of perjury. Notarization shall not be\n required.\n\n 5. Paragraph 103 of the Settlement Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:\n\n\n\n 2\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 24 Filed 06/21/24 Page 3 of 4 PageID 316\n\n\n\n Objection Deadline. No Class Member or other person will be heard on such matters\n unless they have filed with the Court their objection, together with any briefs, papers,\n statements, or other materials they wish the Court to consider, by no later than one\n hundred and five (105) days after the Notice Date, unless otherwise granted permission\n by the Court\n\n 6. Exhibit A to the Settlement Agreement, the Claim Form, is hereby amended as\nreflected in the attached Exhibit 1 (in both redline and clean copy).\n\n 7. Exhibit B to the Settlement Agreement, the Long Form Notice, is hereby amended\nas reflected in the attached Exhibit 2 (in both redline and clean copy).\n\n 8. Exhibit D to the Settlement Agreement, the Proposed Final Approval Order, is\nhereby amended as reflected in the attached Exhibit 3 (in both redline and clean copy).\n\n 9. Exhibit E to the Settlement Agreement, the Proposed Preliminary Approval Order,\nis hereby amended as reflected in the attached Exhibit 4 (in both redline and clean copy).\n\n 10. Exhibit F to the Settlement Agreement, the Short Form Notice, is hereby amended\nas reflected in the attached Exhibit 5 (in both redline and clean copy).\n\n\n\nDated: June 21, 2024 Dated: June 21, 2024\n\n/s/ Raina C. Borrelli /s/ Paulina Nenclares\nRaina C. Borrelli Paulina Nenclares\nSTRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC JONES DAY\nOne Magnificent Mile 2727 N. Harwood St., Suite 600\n980 N Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610 Dallas, TX 75201\nChicago IL, 60611 Telephone: (214) 969-3638\nTelephone: (872) 263-1100 pnenclares@jonesday.com\nraina@straussborrelli.com\n Counsel for Defendant\nCounsel for Plaintiff and the Settlement\nClass\n\n\n\n\n 3\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 24 Filed 06/21/24 Page 4 of 4 PageID 317\n\n\n\n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n I, Raina C. Borrelli, hereby certify that on June 21, 2024, I electronically filed the foregoing\n\nwith the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing\n\nto counsel of record, below, via the ECF system.\n\nDATED this 21st day of June, 2024.\n\n\n TURKE & STRAUSS LLP\n\n By: /s/ Raina C. Borrelli\n Raina C. Borrelli\n STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC\n 980 Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610\n Chicago, Illinois 60611\n Telephone: (872) 263-1100\n Facsimile: (872) 263-1109\n raina@straussborrelli.com\n\n\n\n\n 4\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2025-12-24T07:15:48.931595-08:00","document_number":"24","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177016932317","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.727860-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.732546-08:00","date_filed":"2024-06-21","time_filed":null,"entry_number":24,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-06-21.001","pacer_sequence_number":63,"description":"First STIPULATION to Amend the Settlement Agreement by Amanda Fitton. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) 1, # 2 Exhibit(s) 2, # 3 Exhibit(s) 3, # 4 Exhibit(s) 4, # 5 Exhibit(s) 5) (Borrelli, Raina) (Entered: 06/21/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115633/","id":410115633,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747587/","id":422747587,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/23/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.706405-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.716369-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"23","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.689050-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.692677-08:00","date_filed":"2024-06-18","time_filed":null,"entry_number":23,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-06-18.002","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"ELECTRONIC Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Jane J Boyle: Motion Hearing held on 6/18/2024 re 19 Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Settlement. Attorney Appearances: Plaintiff - Raina C Borrelli and Joe Kendall; Defense - Kurt Copper. (Court Reporter: Rachel Erickson) (No exhibits) Time in Court - 0:21. (chmb) (Entered: 06/18/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115632/","id":410115632,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747586/","id":422747586,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/22/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.667336-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.676800-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"22","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177016923607","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.650111-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.654208-08:00","date_filed":"2024-06-18","time_filed":null,"entry_number":22,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-06-18.001","pacer_sequence_number":58,"description":"NOTICE of Change of Address for Attorney Raina C Borrelli on behalf of Amanda Fitton. (Filer confirms contact info in ECF is current.) (Borrelli, Raina) (Entered: 06/18/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115631/","id":410115631,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747585/","id":422747585,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.629671-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.638618-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.618129-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.618138-08:00","date_filed":"2024-04-30","time_filed":null,"entry_number":null,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-04-30.002","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"Hearing Modification: Hearing set per 21 Order on Motion to Dismiss. Motion Hearing set for 6/18/2024 10:00 AM in US Courthouse, Courtroom 1516, 1100 Commerce St., Dallas, TX 75242-1310 before Judge Jane J Boyle. (kcr)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115630/","id":410115630,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747584/","id":422747584,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/21/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.599096-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.610820-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"21","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.581312-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.585854-08:00","date_filed":"2024-04-30","time_filed":null,"entry_number":21,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-04-30.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"ELECTRONIC ORDER finding as moot 11 Motion to Dismiss. The parties are ordered to attend a hearing before this Court to address Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement. The hearing is set for June 18, 2024, at 10:00 AM in U.S. Courthouse, Courtroom 1516, 1100 Commerce St., Dallas, TX 75242-1310 before Judge Jane J Boyle. (Ordered by Judge Jane J Boyle on 4/30/2024) (chmb) (Entered: 04/30/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115629/","id":410115629,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747583/","id":422747583,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/20/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.563753-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.572068-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"20","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177016629268","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.547114-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.551640-08:00","date_filed":"2024-02-16","time_filed":null,"entry_number":20,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-02-16.002","pacer_sequence_number":50,"description":"Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Amanda Fitton re 19 MOTION Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Settlement (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) 1 - Settlement Agreement, # 2 Declaration(s) of Raina C. Borrelli, # 3 Exhibit(s) A - Turke & Strauss Firm Resume) (Borrelli, Raina) (Entered: 02/16/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115628/","id":410115628,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747581/","id":422747581,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/19/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.526665-08:00","date_modified":"2026-03-12T07:55:30.006157-07:00","sha1":"b5cbb9489c0095264e9b85a42921c1597daae3d9","page_count":4,"file_size":263977,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.19.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.19.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 19 Filed 02/16/24 Page 1 of 4 PageID 161\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n DALLAS DIVISION\n\nAMANDA FITTON, on behalf of herself and\nall others similarly situated, Case No. 3:23cv1559\n\n Plaintiff, PLAINTIFF\u2019S UNOPPOSED MOTION\n FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF\nv. CLASS SETTLEMENT\n\nPINNACLE PROPANE, LLC,\n\n Defendant.\n\n\n\n Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter an Order:\n\n 1) Preliminarily approving the Settlement;\n\n 2) Directing that Notice be disseminated to the Settlement Class Members in accordance\n\n with the Notice Program;\n\n 3) Appointing Analytics as Settlement Administrator;\n\n 4) Approving the form and content of the Claim Form (Ex. A), Long Form Notice (Ex.\n\n B), and Short Form Notice (Ex. F), attached to the Settlement Agreement;\n\n 5) Appointing Amanda Fitton as Representative of the Class;\n\n 6) Appointing Raina Borrelli of Turke & Strauss LLP as Settlement Class Counsel;\n\n 7) Scheduling a Final Fairness Hearing to consider the entry of the final order and\n\n judgment approving the Settlement and the request for attorneys\u2019 fees, costs, expenses,\n\n and Plaintiff\u2019s service award to be held at least 120 days after entry of the Preliminary\n\n Approval Order; and\n\n 8) Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.\n\n\n\n\n 1\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 19 Filed 02/16/24 Page 2 of 4 PageID 162\n\n\n\nRespectfully submitted,\n\nDated: February 16, 2024 /s/Raina C. Borrelli ____\n\n\n TURKE & STRAUSS LLP\n Samuel J. Strauss\n Raina Borrelli\n 613 Williamson Street, Suite\n 201\n Madison, Wisconsin 53703\n Telephone: (608) 237-1775\n Facsimile: (608) 509-4423\n sam@turkestrauss.com\n raina@turkestrauss.com\n\n Joe Kendall\n Kendall Law Group PLLC\n 3811 Turtle Creek Blvd. Suite\n 1450\n Dallas, TX 75219\n 214-744-3000\n Fax: 214-744-3015\n Email:\n Jkendall@kendalllawgroup.Com\n\n\n Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class\n\n\n\n\n 2\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 19 Filed 02/16/24 Page 3 of 4 PageID 163\n\n\n\n CERTIFICTE OF CONFERENCE\n\n I hereby certify that the parties conferred on the issue before seeking the relief sought\n\nherein and all parties agreed to pursue such relief as an agreed joint motion.\n\n /s/ Raina C. Borrelli\n\n Raina C. Borrelli\n\n\n\n\n 3\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 19 Filed 02/16/24 Page 4 of 4 PageID 164\n\n\n\n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served on all counsel of record\n\non February 16, 2024 via CM/ECF, in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.\n\n /s/ Raina C. Borrelli\n\n Raina C. Borrelli\n\n\n\n\n 4\n\f","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-03-11T18:42:40.108382-07:00","document_number":"19","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177016629248","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.509591-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.514402-08:00","date_filed":"2024-02-16","time_filed":null,"entry_number":19,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-02-16.001","pacer_sequence_number":48,"description":"MOTION Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Settlement filed by Amanda Fitton with Brief/Memorandum in Support. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Borrelli, Raina) (Entered: 02/16/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115627/","id":410115627,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747580/","id":422747580,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/18/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.492956-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.501280-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"18","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.476532-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.480762-08:00","date_filed":"2024-01-03","time_filed":null,"entry_number":18,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-01-03.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"ELECTRONIC ORDER: The parties indicated in their 17 Joint Status Report that a class action settlement agreement has been reached. The parties are DIRECTED to file a Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement by February 16, 2024. (Ordered by Judge Jane J Boyle on 1/3/2024) (chmb) (Entered: 01/03/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115626/","id":410115626,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747579/","id":422747579,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/17/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.458947-08:00","date_modified":"2026-03-12T07:55:34.683973-07:00","sha1":"e0876304cdcebe0ad4af306a61d616488fa34a52","page_count":3,"file_size":150386,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.17.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017/gov.uscourts.txnd.379017.17.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 17 Filed 01/02/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID 158\n\n\n\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n LUBBOCK DIVISION\n\nAMANDA FITTON, on behalf of herself and\nall others similarly situated, Case No. 3:23-cv-01559-B\n\n Plaintiff,\n\nv.\n\nPINNACLE PROPANE, LLC,\n\n Defendant.\n\n\n\n JOINT STATUS REPORT, NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT, AND REQUEST TO STAY\n\n Plaintiff Amanda Fitton and Defendant Pinnacle Propane, LLC, by and through their\n\ncounsel, submit this Joint Status Report regarding mediation.\n\n 1. On September 12, 2023, the Parties filed a joint motion to stay briefing and case\n\ndeadlines pending mediation. Doc. 12.\n\n 2. The Court granted the parties\u2019 joint motion on September 15, 2023,\n\nadministratively closing the case pending mediation and ordering the parties to provide status\n\nreports regarding mediation every 60 days, with the first report due on November 14, 2023, and\n\nthe second report due on January 15, 2024. Doc. 13.\n\n 3. The parties held the scheduled mediation with Hon. Jay Gandhi (Ret.) of JAMS on\n\nDecember 5, 2023. As a result of that mediation, the parties reached agreement on the material\n\nterms of a class settlement.\n\n 4. Therefore, the parties request that the case remain administratively closed pending\n\nPlaintiff\u2019s motion for preliminary approval, which Plaintiff intends to submit by February 16,\n\n2024.\n\n\n\n 1\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 17 Filed 01/02/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID 159\n\n\n\nDate: January 2, 2024 Date: January 2, 2024\n\nRespectfully submitted, Respectfully submitted,\n\n/s/ Raina C. Borrelli /s/ Paulina Nenclares\nRaina C. Borrelli (pro hac vice) Paulina Nenclares\nSamuel J. Strauss* State Bar No. 24121032\nTURKE & STRAUSS LLP JONES DAY\n613 Williamson Street, Suite 201 2727 North Harwood Street\nMadison, Wisconsin 53703 Dallas, TX 75201-1515\nTelephone: (608) 237-1775 Telephone: (214) 969-2628\nFacsimile: (608) 509-4423 E: pnenclares@jonesday.com\nraina@turkestrauss.com\nsam@turkestrauss.com John A. Vogt (admission pro hac\n vice forthcoming)\nJoe Kendall JONES DAY\nTexas Bar No. 11260700 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800\nKENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC Irvine, California 92612-4408\n3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 1450 Telephone: (949) 851-3939\nDallas, Texas 75219 E: javogt@jonesday.com\nTelephone: 214/744-3000 E: rball@jonesday.com\nFacsimile: 214/744-3015\njkendall@kendalllawgroup.com Counsel for Defendant Pinnacle\n Propane, LLC\nAttorneys for Plaintiff and Proposed\nClass\n\n*Pro Hac Vice Forthcoming\n\n\n\n\n 2\n\fCase 3:23-cv-01559-B Document 17 Filed 01/02/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID 160\n\n\n\n CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n I, Raina C. Borrelli, hereby certify that on January 2, 2024, I electronically filed the\n\nforegoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of\n\nsuch filing to counsel of record via the ECF system.\n\nDATED this 2nd day of January, 2024.\n\n\n TURKE & STRAUSS LLP\n\n By: /s/ Raina C. Borrelli\n Raina C. Borrelli\n raina@turkestrauss.com\n TURKE & STRAUSS LLP\n 613 Williamson St., Suite 201\n Madison, WI 53703\n Telephone: (608) 237-1775\n Facsimile: (608) 509-4423\n\n\n\n\n 3\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2026-03-11T18:42:41.099513-07:00","document_number":"17","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177016510096","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.443294-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.447121-08:00","date_filed":"2024-01-02","time_filed":null,"entry_number":17,"recap_sequence_number":"2024-01-02.001","pacer_sequence_number":42,"description":"Joint STATUS REPORT, Notice of Settlement, and Request to Stay filed by Amanda Fitton. (Borrelli, Raina) (Entered: 01/02/2024)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115625/","id":410115625,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747578/","id":422747578,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/16/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.424221-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.431589-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"16","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.404097-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.409379-08:00","date_filed":"2023-11-15","time_filed":null,"entry_number":16,"recap_sequence_number":"2023-11-15.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"ELECTRONIC ORDER: The Court has received the parties' 15 joint status report. The Court agrees with the parties that this matter should remain stayed pending the scheduled mediation on December 5, 2023. The parties are hereby ORDERED to file a joint status report on or before January 15, 2023, indicating the outcome of the mediation and whether the matter should remain stayed. If the parties propose at that time that the stay should be lifted, the joint status report shall contain a proposed schedule for continuing the litigation. (Ordered by Judge Jane J Boyle on 11/15/2023) (chmb) (Entered: 11/15/2023)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115624/","id":410115624,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747577/","id":422747577,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/15/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.383591-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.394727-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"15","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177016409834","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.365268-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.369154-08:00","date_filed":"2023-11-14","time_filed":null,"entry_number":15,"recap_sequence_number":"2023-11-14.001","pacer_sequence_number":35,"description":"Joint STATUS REPORT filed by Amanda Fitton. (Borrelli, Raina) (Entered: 11/14/2023)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115623/","id":410115623,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747576/","id":422747576,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/14/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.343720-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.353062-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"14","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"177016391785","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.327870-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.331997-08:00","date_filed":"2023-11-06","time_filed":null,"entry_number":14,"recap_sequence_number":"2023-11-06.001","pacer_sequence_number":33,"description":"NOTICE of Change of Address for Attorney Joe Kendall on behalf of Amanda Fitton. (Filer confirms contact info in ECF is current.) (Kendall, Joe) (Entered: 11/06/2023)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/410115622/","id":410115622,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67605120/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/422747575/","id":422747575,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67605120/13/fitton-v-pinnacle-propane-llc/","date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.307904-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.317439-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"13","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.285593-08:00","date_modified":"2024-12-04T18:10:06.292534-08:00","date_filed":"2023-09-15","time_filed":null,"entry_number":13,"recap_sequence_number":"2023-09-15.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 12 Joint Motion to Stay Briefing and Case Deadlines. The action is STAYED until November 14, 2023, and the Clerk of Court is instructed to administratively close this case pending mediation. The parties are ORDERED to provide joint reports regarding the status of mediation every 60 days, with the first report due on or before November 14, 2023. (Ordered by Judge Jane J Boyle on 9/15/2023) (chmb) (Entered: 09/15/2023)","tags":[]}],"entries_total":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/?count=on&docket=67605120&page_size=40"}