Preview
MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 1 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2024273558
DeNITTIS OSEFCHEN PRINCE, P.C. HATTIS & LUKACS
Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq. (031981997) Daniel M. Hattis, Esq.*
Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq. (024751992) Paul Karl Lukacs, Esq.
Shane T. Prince, Esq. (022412002) 11711 SE 8th Street, Suite 120
525 Route 73 North, Suite 410 Bellevue, WA 98005
Marlton, New Jersey 08053 (425) 233-8650
(856) 797-9951
CRIDEN & LOVE, P.A. * Admitted Pro Hac Vice
Michael E. Criden, Esq.*
Lindsey C. Grossman, Esq.
7301 SW 57th Court, Suite 515
South Miami, FL 33143
(305) 357-9000
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class
DEAN ESPOSITO, et al., on behalf of SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
themselves and all others similarly situated, MIDDLESEX COUNTY
LAW DIVISION
Plaintiffs,
DOCKET NO. MID-L-6360-23
v.
NOTICE OF MOTION FOR FINAL
CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a VERIZON APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION
WIRELESS, SETTLEMENT; APPROVAL OF AWARD
OF ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS; AND
Defendant. APPROVAL OF INCENTIVE AWARDS
FOR LEAD PLAINTIFFS
To: Clerk, Middlesex County
Return date of motion: March 22, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. (per
Court’s attached December 15, 2023 Order)
Place: Middlesex County Courthouse
56 Paterson Street
New Brunswick, NJ 08903-0964
Please take notice that the undersigned, attorneys for all parties herein, will apply to the
above named court at the Middlesex County Courthouse, 56 Paterson Street, New Brunswick,
New Jersey, for an Order final approval of class action settlement, approval of award of attorney
fees and costs and approval of incentive award for lead plaintiff.
Counsel will rely upon the attached Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Law, certification and
exhibits as part of this motion.
1
MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 2 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2024273558
Pursuant to the Rules, the undersigned:
Do not request oral argument at this time as this is an unopposed motion.
This matter is not currently scheduled for a trial.
DENITTIS OSEFCHEN PRINCE, P.C.
Dated: January 31, 2024 BY: __________________________________
Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq.
Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq.
Shane T. Prince, Esq.
525 Route 73 North, Suite 410
Marlton, NJ 08053
Telephone: (856) 797-9951
Facsimile: (856) 797-9978
Email: sdenittis@denittislaw.com
Email: josefchen@denittislaw.com
Email: sprince@denittislaw.com
HATTIS & LUKACS
Daniel M. Hattis, Esq.*
11711 SE 8th Street, Suite 120
Bellevue, WA 98005
Telephone: (425) 233-8650
Facsimile: (425) 412-7171
Email: dan@hattislaw.com
Email: pkl@hattislaw.com
CRIDEN & LOVE, P.A.
Michael E. Criden, Esq.*
7301 SW 57th Court, Suite 515
South Miami, FL 33143
Telephone: (305) 357-9000
Facsimile: (305) 357-9050
Email: mcriden@cridenlove.com
Email: lgrossman@cridenlove.com
* Admitted Pro Hac Vice
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Certified Class
2
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM1 ofPg
123 of
Trans
14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
FILED
December 15, 2023
ANA C. VISCOMI, J.S.C.
DeNITTIS OSEFCHEN PRINCE, P.C. HATTIS & LUKACS
Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq. (031981997) Daniel M. Hattis, Esq.*
Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq. (024751992) Paul Karl Lukacs, Esq.
Shane T. Prince, Esq. (022412002) 11711 SE 8th Street, Suite 120
525 Route 73 North, Suite 410 Bellevue, WA 98005
Marlton, New Jersey 08053 (425) 233-8650
(856) 797-9951
CRIDEN & LOVE, P.A.
Michael E. Criden, Esq.* * Pro Hac Vice Application
Lindsey C. Grossman, Esq. To Be Submitted
7301 SW 57th Court, Suite 515
South Miami, FL 33143
(305) 357-9000
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class
DEAN ESPOSITO, JEFFREY ACHEY, MARILYN
ACHEY, JUSTIN ANDERSON, DEIDRE ASBJORN, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW
GREGORY BURLAK, CARLA CHIORAZZO, JERSEY
JUDITH CHIORAZZO, JOHN CONWAY, ADAM
DEMARCO, JAMES FISHER, ALLISON MIDDLESEX COUNTY
GILLINGHAM, LORRAINE GILLINGHAM, LAW DIVISION
DOREE GORDON, DONNA HARTMAN,
PATRICIA JUSTICE, DAVID KELLY, CHRISTINA DOCKET NO. MID-L-6360-23
MANFREDO, JUDITH OELENSCHLAGER,
DANIEL PATINO, JAMES PRATE, MICHAEL ORDER GRANTING
SCHEUFELE, RUSSELL SEWEKOW, DEBORAH PRELIMINARY APPROVAL
STROYEK, LINDA TEER, CHRISTINE TRAPPE, OF CLASS SETTLEMENT
BRENDA TRIPICCHIO, TERESA AGREEMENT AND
MACCLELLAND, KAREN UMBERGER, SCOTT DIRECTING DISSEMINATION
WILLITS, MICHAEL BRANOM, MOLLY BROWN, OF CLASS NOTICE
MICHAEL CARNEY, TIM FRASCH, PATRICIA
GAGAN, ANNA GUTIERREZ, LINDA JENKINS,
AUGUSTUS JOHNSON, WILLIAM KAUPELIS,
MARILYN KAYE, JANETTE LISNER, WILLIAM
ERIC LOUGH, DAVID MASSARO, LOUISE
MONSOUR, DARLEEN PEREZ, GABRIELLE
POZZUOLI, VALERIE REED, BRUCE SCHRAMM,
KERRY SHOWALTER, JOHN ST. JARRE, GLORIA
STERN, EDNA TOY, TERESA TOY, VANESSA
WEST, MARY BOWMAN, ART CAPRI, DEBRA
CASEY, KARYN CHALLENDER. TYSON
COHRON, CINTIA CORSI, ANDI ELLIS, LAURIE
FRANTZ, ASHLEY GARRISON, ANGELA GREEN,
CARLOS GUTIERREZ, JAMES HOLLING, KAREN
HUDSON, JERRY HUNT, JENNIFER HURTT,
JOYCE JONES, LYNN KIRALY, MICHELLE
LACUESTA, JASON MCCONVILLE, JOSE NICOT,
SANDRA OSHIRO, LESLIE OWENS, JON
SANTOS, TERRY SEXTON, KATHLEEN WRIGHT,
PAMELA M. ALLEN, SAMANTHA ALBAITIS,
CYDNI ARTERBURY, LISA BAKER, BRIANA
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM2 ofPg
124 of
Trans
14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
BELL, CHRISTINE BELLAVIA, KIMBERLY
BLAIR, LEANOR BLAND-MULLINS, CAROLINE
BONHAM, TAMMY BURKE, ANNMARIE
CALDWELL, SHAUNA CAVALLARO, SANTOS
COLON, ERIKA CONLEY, KENDRA CONOVER,
DYLAN CORBIN, LAURA CURRY, SHAKERA
DYER, JANE FREY, RUSSELL FROM, ANGEL
GAINES, ASHTIN GAMBLIN, ERICKA
GARDNER, ANN GRAFF, JAMES HENSLEY,
SAREL HINES, ALEXANDER KEELER, ADAM
KELLER, BILLIE KENDRICK, KRISTA KIRBY,
JAN LOMBARD, MARC LOWREY, JILL
MAILHOIT, AARON MAXA, KELLY MOORE,
LINDSEY MORAN, DAVID MOYERS, JENNIFER
OCAMPO-NEUBAUER, KEISHA ODOM, ANGEL
PACHECHO, HEATHER RAY, SUSAN SCOTT,
LORI SNYDER, MISTY SUTTON, KATHRYN
TAYLOR, ANTHONY VALLECORSA, CLAIRE
WHITE, KRISTOPHER WILLARD, ALVIN
WILSON, and BRAD YOUNG, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a VERIZON
WIRELESS,
Defendant.
Before the Court is the Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Settlement Agreement
and for Direction of Class Notice Pursuant to N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2 (“Motion”), filed by Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs and Defendant Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless (“Verizon”) have entered
into a Class Settlement Agreement, dated November 10, 2023 (“Settlement Agreement”). Having
thoroughly reviewed the Settlement Agreement, including the proposed forms of class notice and
other exhibits thereto, the Motion, and the papers and arguments in connection therewith, and
good cause appearing, it is on this 15th day of December, 2023, the Court hereby ORDERS as
follows:
1. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meanings set forth in the
Settlement Agreement.
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM3 ofPg
125 of
Trans
14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter, and has personal
jurisdiction over the Parties and the Settlement Class Members. Venue is proper in this Court.
3. The Motion is GRANTED.
4. The Court hereby preliminarily approves the Settlement Agreement and the terms
embodied therein pursuant to N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2. The Court finds that it will likely be able to
approve the Settlement Agreement under N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2 and to certify the Settlement Class
for purposes of judgment on the proposed Settlement. The Court preliminarily finds that the
Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate as to the Settlement Class Members
under the relevant considerations. The Court finds that Plaintiffs and proposed Settlement Class
Counsel have adequately represented, and will continue to adequately represent, the Settlement
Class. The Court further finds that the Settlement Agreement is the product of arms’ length
negotiations by the Parties through an experienced mediator, Hon. Jay C. Gandhi (ret.) of JAMS,
and comes after significant litigation—including significant litigation regarding Verizon’s
motions to compel arbitration of Plaintiffs’ claims and to stay the respective litigations, resulting
in multiple rounds of briefing and appeals to date—and significant investigation and discovery.
The Court preliminarily finds that the relief provided—a non-reversionary common settlement
fund of $100 million—is adequate taking into account, inter alia, the costs, risks, and delay of
trial and appeal for all Parties, the legal issues presented in this Action, the interests of the
proposed Settlement Class, and the proposed method of distributing payments to the Settlement
Class (i.e., direct payments by checks and electronic payments). The Court preliminarily finds
that the Settlement Agreement treats the Settlement Class Members equitably relative to each
other, and that the proposed allocation of settlement funds to Settlement Class Members is
reasonable and equitable. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, all Settlement Class
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM4 ofPg
126 of
Trans
14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
Members are eligible to submit claims for settlement payments via a simple claim form. The
Court will fully assess any request for attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses after receiving a
motion from Settlement Class Counsel supporting such request. At this stage, the Court finds
that the plan to request fees and litigation expenses to be paid from the common settlement fund
creates no reason not to direct notice to the Settlement Class; should this Court find any aspect of
the requested attorneys’ fees or expenses unsupported or unwarranted, such funds will not revert
to Verizon.
5. The Court hereby provisionally certifies, for settlement purposes only, a
“Settlement Class,” pursuant to N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1(b)(3) and 4:32-2, consisting of:
All current and former individual consumer account holders in the United States
(based on account holders’ last known billing address) who received postpaid
wireless or data services from Verizon and who were charged and paid an
Administrative Charge and/or an Administrative and Telco Recovery Charge
between January 1, 2016 and November 8, 2023.
Excluded from the Settlement Class are any Judges presiding over this Action and
any members of their families, and Verizon and affiliated entities and individuals
and their respective officers and directors.
Also excluded from the Settlement Class are those persons who submit a timely
and valid request for exclusion in accordance with the procedures set forth in the
Settlement Agreement and in this Court’s Preliminary Approval Order.
6. The Court finds that, for settlement purposes only, the Settlement Class, as
defined above, meets the requirements for class certification under N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1—
namely, that (1) the Settlement Class Members are sufficiently numerous such that joinder is
impracticable; (2) there are common questions of law and fact; (3) Plaintiffs’ claims are typical
of those of the Settlement Class Members; (4) Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Counsel have
adequately represented, and will continue to adequately represent the interests of the Settlement
Class Members; and (5) for purposes of settlement only, the Settlement Class meets the
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM5 ofPg
127 of
Trans
14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
predominance and superiority requirements of N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1(b)(3).
7. Certification of the Settlement Class and appointment of the Settlement Class
Representatives and Settlement Class Counsel shall be solely for settlement purposes and
without prejudice to the Parties in the event the Settlement Agreement is not finally approved by
this Court or otherwise does not take effect. If the Settlement does not occur for any reason,
certification of the Settlement Class and any Settlement Class Representative or Settlement Class
Counsel appointments, including this Order, shall be deemed void and vacated. The Parties
reserve all rights and defenses as they existed prior to the execution of the Settlement Agreement
and this Order in the event the Settlement Agreement is not finally approved by this Court or
otherwise does not take effect.
8. The Court hereby appoints Plaintiffs in the caption set forth above as Settlement
Class Representatives to represent the Settlement Class.
9. The Court hereby appoints the following attorneys as Settlement Class Counsel
for the Settlement Class:
DeNITTIS OSEFCHEN PRINCE, P.C.
Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq.
Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq.
Shane T. Prince, Esq.
525 Route 73 North, Suite 410
Marlton, NJ 08053
Telephone: (856) 797-9951
Facsimile: (856) 797-9978
Email: sdenittis@denittislaw.com
Email: josefchen@denittislaw.com
Email: sprince@denittislaw.com
HATTIS & LUKACS
Daniel M. Hattis, Esq.
Paul Karl Lukacs, Esq.
11711 SE 8th Street, Suite 120
Bellevue, WA 98005
Telephone: (425) 233-8650
Facsimile: (425) 412-7171
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM6 ofPg
128 of
Trans
14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
Email: dan@hattislaw.com
Email: pkl@hattislaw.com
10. The Court hereby appoints Angeion Group as Settlement Administrator and
directs Angeion Group to carry out all duties and responsibilities of the Settlement Administrator
as specified in the Settlement Agreement and herein.
Notice Program
11. Pursuant to N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2(b), the Court approves the proposed Notice
program set forth at Section VI of the Settlement Agreement, including the form and content of
the proposed forms of class notice attached as Exhibits A-E to the Settlement Agreement. The
Court finds that the proposed Notice program meets the requirements of Due Process under the
U.S. Constitution and N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2; and that such Notice program, which includes
individual direct notice to Settlement Class Members via email or mail, reminder notices, and
the establishment of a Settlement Website and Toll-Free Number is the best notice practicable
under the circumstances and shall constitute due and sufficient notice to all persons entitled
thereto. The Court further finds that the proposed form and content of the forms of the Notice
are adequate and will give the Settlement Class Members sufficient information to enable them
to make informed decisions as to the Settlement Class, the right to object or opt out, and the
proposed Settlement and its terms. The Court finds that the Notice clearly and concisely states in
plain, easily understood language, inter alia: (i) the nature of the Action; (ii) the definition of the
Settlement Class; (iii) the class claims and issues; (iv) that a Settlement Class Member may enter
an appearance through an attorney if the member so desires; (v) that the Court will exclude from
the Settlement Class any member who timely and validly requests exclusion; (vi) the time and
manner for requesting exclusion; and (vii) the binding effect of a class judgment on Settlement
Class Members under N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1 and 4:32-2.
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM7 ofPg
129 of
Trans
14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
12. The Court directs the Settlement Administrator and the Parties to implement the
Notice program as set forth in the Settlement Agreement.
Claims Procedure
13. The Court approves the form and content of the proposed Claim Form, in the
form attached as Exhibit E to the Settlement Agreement, approves the Claims Process set forth in
the Settlement Agreement for Settlement Class Members to submit Claims, and directs the
Parties and the Settlement Administrator to implement the Claims Process.
Opt-Out and Objection Procedures
14. Settlement Class Members may exclude themselves from the Settlement Class by
mailing to the Settlement Administrator, at the address provided in the Website Notice, a request
for exclusion that is postmarked no later than thirty-five days after the Notice Date (the
“Exclusion Deadline”). To be effective, the request for exclusion must include (1) the Settlement
Class Member’s full name, telephone number, mailing address, and email address; (2) a clear
statement that the Settlement Class Member wishes to be excluded from the Settlement Class; (3)
the name of this Action: “Esposito et al. v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless”; and (4)
the Settlement Class Member’s original signature. In addition, for the request for exclusion to be
effective, the sender’s mailing address as reflected in the request for exclusion and on the
mailing envelope itself must match the mailing address associated with the Settlement Class
Member’s Verizon account. Requests for exclusion furthermore must be made on an individual
basis; “mass,” “class,” or other purported group opt outs are not effective. Any Settlement Class
Member who submits a timely and valid request for exclusion is foreclosed from objecting to the
Settlement or to Settlement Class Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and service
awards. If a Settlement Class Member submits both a timely and valid request for exclusion and
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM8 ofPg1210 Trans
of 14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
an objection, the Settlement Class Member shall be treated as if they had only submitted a
request for exclusion. The Settlement Administrator shall promptly after receipt provide copies
of any requests for exclusion, including any related correspondence, to Settlement Class Counsel
and Verizon’s Counsel. Any Settlement Class Member who does not submit a timely and valid
request for exclusion as set forth in this paragraph and in the Settlement Agreement shall be
bound by all subsequent proceedings, orders, and judgments in this Action, including, but not
limited to, the Release as defined in the Settlement Agreement, regardless of whether the
Settlement Class Member has any pending claims or causes of action against Verizon.
15. Any Settlement Class Member who does not submit a timely and valid request for
exclusion shall have the right to object to the proposed Settlement and/or to Settlement Class
Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, or service awards, only by complying with the
objection provisions set forth herein and in the Settlement Agreement. Settlement Class
Members who object shall remain Settlement Class Members and shall be subject to the Release
set forth in this Settlement Agreement if this Settlement is approved by the Court and becomes
effective. To be considered valid, an objection must be in writing, must be filed with the Court
or mailed to the Court at the address listed in the Website Notice, postmarked/filed no later than
25 days before the Fairness Hearing (the “Objection Deadline”), and must include the following:
(1) the name of this Action: “Esposito et al. v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless”; (2)
the full name, mailing address, telephone number, and email address of the objector; (3) the
objector’s original signature; (4) a description of the specific reasons for the objection; (5) the
name, address, bar number and telephone number of counsel for the objector, if the objector is
represented by an attorney; and (6) state whether the objector intends to appear at the Fairness
Hearing either in person or through counsel. Any Settlement Class Member who does not timely
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM9 ofPg1211 Trans
of 14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
submit an objection in accordance with this section shall waive the right to object or to be heard
at the Fairness Hearing and shall be forever barred from making any objection to the proposed
Settlement or to Settlement Class Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and service
awards. Any Settlement Class Member who objects to the Settlement shall nevertheless be
eligible for all benefits of the Settlement if it is approved and becomes final. The Settlement
Administrator shall promptly after receipt provide copies of any objections, including any related
correspondence, to Settlement Class Counsel and Verizon’s Counsel.
Fairness Hearing
16. The Court will hold a Fairness Hearing on March 22, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. at the
Superior Court of New Jersey, Middlesex County located at 56 Paterson Street, New Brunswick,
New Jersey. The purposes of the Fairness Hearing will be to: (i) determine whether the proposed
Settlement Agreement should be finally approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, adequate, and
in the best interests of the Settlement Class; (ii) determine whether judgment should be entered
pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, dismissing the Action with prejudice and releasing all
Released Claims; (iii) determine whether the Settlement Class should be finally certified; (iv)
rule on Settlement Class Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and service awards; (v)
consider any properly filed objections; and (vi) consider any other matters necessary in
connection with the final approval of the Settlement Agreement.
17. By no later than fifteen days after the Notice Date, Plaintiffs and Settlement Class
Counsel shall file their: (a) motion for final approval of the Settlement Agreement, requesting
entry of the Final Order and Judgment, substantially in the form of Exhibit G to the Settlement
Agreement; and (b) motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and service awards. Promptly after they
are filed, these document(s) shall be posted on the Settlement Website.
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM10 of
Pg12
12 of
Trans
14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
18. By no later than twenty-one days before the Fairness Hearing, the Settlement
Administrator shall file with the Court (or provide to Settlement Class Counsel for filing with the
Court) copies of any objections received by the Settlement Administrator.
19. By no later than fourteen days before the Fairness Hearing, the Parties shall file
any responses to any Settlement Class Member objections, and any reply papers in support of the
motion for final approval of the Settlement and/or in support of Settlement Class Counsel’s
motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and service awards.
20. The Court may, in its discretion, modify the date and/or time of the Fairness
Hearing, and may order that this hearing be held remotely or telephonically. In the event the
Court changes the date, time, and/or the format of the Fairness Hearing, the Parties shall ensure
that the updated information is posted on the Settlement Website.
21. Only Settlement Class Members who have submitted timely and valid objections,
in accordance with the requirements of this Preliminary Approval Order, may be heard at the
Fairness Hearing.
22. If the Settlement Agreement, including any amendment made in accordance
therewith, is not approved by the Court or shall not become effective for any reason whatsoever,
the Settlement Agreement and any actions taken or to be taken in connection therewith
(including this Preliminary Approval Order and any judgment entered herein), shall be
terminated and shall become null and void and of no further force and effect except for (i) any
obligations to pay for any expense incurred in connection with Notice and administration as set
forth in the Settlement Agreement, and (ii) any other obligations or provisions that are expressly
designated in the Settlement Agreement to survive the termination of the Settlement Agreement,
including the Parties’ agreement to cooperate in asking the Court to set a reasonable schedule for
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM11 of
Pg12
13 of
Trans
14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
the resumption of this Action and any parallel litigations brought by the Plaintiffs or Settlement
Class Counsel against Verizon, as well as any pending or stayed appeals including the New
Jersey Supreme Court appeal in Achey v. Cellco Partnership, Dkt. No. 088253 (N.J.) and Ninth
Circuit appeal in MacClelland v. Cellco Partnership, 22-16020 (9th Cir.), as described in
Sections X.E and XII.B of the Settlement Agreement.
23. Other than such proceedings as may be necessary to carry out the terms and
conditions of the Settlement Agreement, all proceedings in the Action are hereby stayed and
suspended until further order of this Court.
24. Pending final determination of whether the Settlement Agreement should be
finally approved, Plaintiffs and all Settlement Class Members are barred and enjoined from
filing, commencing, prosecuting, or enforcing any action against Verizon or the other Released
Parties insofar as such action asserts Released Claims, directly or indirectly, in any judicial,
administrative, arbitral, or other forum. This bar and injunction is necessary to protect and
effectuate the Settlement Agreement and this Preliminary Approval Order, and this Court’s
authority to effectuate the Settlement, and is ordered in aid of this Court’s jurisdiction.
25. This Preliminary Approval Order, the Settlement Agreement, and all negotiations,
statements, agreements, and proceedings relating to the Settlement, or any matters arising in
connection with settlement negotiations, proceedings, or agreements, shall not constitute, be
described as, construed as, offered or received against Verizon or the other Released Parties as
evidence or an admission of: (a) the truth of any fact alleged by Plaintiffs in the Action; (b) that
any person suffered compensable harm or is entitled to any relief with respect to the matters
asserted in this Action; (c) any liability, negligence, fault, or wrongdoing by Verizon or the
Released Parties, including any of its affiliates, agents, representatives, vendors, or any other
MID-L-006360-23
MID-L-006360-23
01/31/2024
12/15/2023
5:03:32Pg
PM12 of
Pg12
14 of
Trans
14 ID:
Trans
LCV20233659560
ID: LCV2024273558
person or entity acting on its behalf; (d) that this Action or any other action was or may be
properly certified as a class action for litigation, non-settlement purposes; (e) the arbitrability of
the Action as to Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Members; or (f) the enforceability of any
applicable contractual or statutory limitations period to limit any relief.
26. The Court retains jurisdiction over this Action to consider all further matters
arising out of or connected with the Settlement, including enforcement of the Release provided
for in the Settlement Agreement.
27. The Parties are directed to take all necessary and appropriate steps to establish the
means necessary to implement the Settlement Agreement according to its terms should it be
finally approved.
28. The Court may, for good cause, extend any of the deadlines set forth in this
Preliminary Approval Order without further notice to Settlement Class Members. Without
further order of the Court, the Parties may agree to make non-material modifications in
implementing the Settlement that are not inconsistent with this Preliminary Approval Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: _December 15, 2023__
/s/ Ana C. Viscomi
_______________________________
Hon. Ana C. Viscomi, J.S.C.
(X) Unopposed ( ) Opposed
The court has reviewed this application for preliminary approval of the class action settlement
agreement and dissemination of class notice and grants same for substantially the reasons set
forth in the application and pleadings submitted by class counsel for plaintiff class and
defendant. Although the court received correspondence initially from an attorney not plenary
admitted to practice in New Jersey and not admitted by pro hac vice application, and later
received correspondence from a New Jersey attorney indicating an intervenor motion would be
filed in order to object to this motion for preliminary approval, there is no basis for adjourning
this motion. Counsel may seek to intervene and otherwise object in accordance with the terms of
this Order.
MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 1 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558
DeNITTIS OSEFCHEN PRINCE, P.C. HATTIS & LUKACS
Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq. (031981997) Daniel M. Hattis, Esq.*
Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq. (024751992) Paul Karl Lukacs, Esq.
Shane T. Prince, Esq. (022412002) 11711 SE 8th Street, Suite 120
525 Route 73 North, Suite 410 Bellevue, WA 98005
Marlton, New Jersey 08053 (425) 233-8650
(856) 797-9951
CRIDEN & LOVE, P.A. * Admitted Pro Hac Vice
Michael E. Criden, Esq.*
Lindsey C. Grossman, Esq.
7301 SW 57th Court, Suite 515
South Miami, FL 33143
(305) 357-9000
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class
DEAN ESPOSITO, JEFFREY ACHEY, MARILYN
ACHEY, JUSTIN ANDERSON, DEIDRE ASBJORN, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW
GREGORY BURLAK, CARLA CHIORAZZO, JERSEY
JUDITH CHIORAZZO, JOHN CONWAY, ADAM
DEMARCO, JAMES FISHER, ALLISON MIDDLESEX COUNTY
GILLINGHAM, LORRAINE GILLINGHAM, LAW DIVISION
DOREE GORDON, DONNA HARTMAN,
PATRICIA JUSTICE, DAVID KELLY, CHRISTINA DOCKET NO. MID-L-6360
MANFREDO, JUDITH OELENSCHLAGER,
DANIEL PATINO, JAMES PRATE, MICHAEL [PROPOSED] FINAL ORDER
SCHEUFELE, RUSSELL SEWEKOW, DEBORAH AND JUDGMENT
STROYEK, LINDA TEER, CHRISTINE TRAPPE,
BRENDA TRIPICCHIO, TERESA
MACCLELLAND, KAREN UMBERGER, SCOTT
WILLITS, MICHAEL BRANOM, MOLLY BROWN,
MICHAEL CARNEY, TIM FRASCH, PATRICIA
GAGAN, ANNA GUTIERREZ, LINDA JENKINS,
AUGUSTUS JOHNSON, WILLIAM KAUPELIS,
MARILYN KAYE, JANETTE LISNER, WILLIAM
ERIC LOUGH, DAVID MASSARO, LOUISE
MONSOUR, DARLEEN PEREZ, GABRIELLE
POZZUOLI, VALERIE REED, BRUCE SCHRAMM,
KERRY SHOWALTER, JOHN ST. JARRE, GLORIA
STERN, EDNA TOY, TERESA TOY, VANESSA
WEST, MARY BOWMAN, ART CAPRI, DEBRA
CASEY, KARYN CHALLENDER. TYSON
COHRON, CINTIA CORSI, ANDI ELLIS, LAURIE
FRANTZ, ASHLEY GARRISON, ANGELA GREEN,
CARLOS GUTIERREZ, JAMES HOLLING, KAREN
HUDSON, JERRY HUNT, JENNIFER HURTT,
JOYCE JONES, LYNN KIRALY, MICHELLE
LACUESTA, JASON MCCONVILLE, JOSE NICOT,
SANDRA OSHIRO, LESLIE OWENS, JON
SANTOS, TERRY SEXTON, KATHLEEN WRIGHT,
PAMELA M. ALLEN, SAMANTHA ALBAITIS,
CYDNI ARTERBURY, LISA BAKER, BRIANA
MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 2 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558
BELL, CHRISTINE BELLAVIA, KIMBERLY
BLAIR, LEANOR BLAND-MULLINS, CAROLINE
BONHAM, TAMMY BURKE, ANNMARIE
CALDWELL, SHAUNA CAVALLARO, SANTOS
COLON, ERIKA CONLEY, KENDRA CONOVER,
DYLAN CORBIN, LAURA CURRY, SHAKERA
DYER, JANE FREY, RUSSELL FROM, ANGEL
GAINES, ASHTIN GAMBLIN, ERICKA
GARDNER, ANN GRAFF, JAMES HENSLEY,
SAREL HINES, ALEXANDER KEELER, ADAM
KELLER, BILLIE KENDRICK, KRISTA KIRBY,
JAN LOMBARD, MARC LOWREY, JILL
MAILHOIT, AARON MAXA, KELLY MOORE,
LINDSEY MORAN, DAVID MOYERS, JENNIFER
OCAMPO-NEUBAUER, KEISHA ODOM, ANGEL
PACHECHO, HEATHER RAY, SUSAN SCOTT,
LORI SNYDER, MISTY SUTTON, KATHRYN
TAYLOR, ANTHONY VALLECORSA, CLAIRE
WHITE, KRISTOPHER WILLARD, ALVIN
WILSON, and BRAD YOUNG, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a VERIZON
WIRELESS,
Defendant.
This matter came before the Court for hearing on March 22, 2024, pursuant to the Court’s
Preliminary Approval Order dated December 15, 2023, and on the motion (“Motion”) for final
approval of the Settlement Agreement, dated November 8, 2023 entered into by the Parties (the
“Settlement Agreement”), as well as Settlement Class Counsel’s motion for an award of
attorneys’ fees, costs, and service awards. Due and adequate notice having been given to the
Settlement Class Members of the proposed Settlement and the pending motions, as directed by
the Court’s Preliminary Approval Order, and upon consideration of all papers filed and
proceedings had herein, and good cause appearing, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows:
1. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meanings set forth in the
Settlement Agreement.
2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter and has personal
MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 3 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558
jurisdiction over the Parties and the Settlement Class Members. Venue is proper in this Court.
3. The “Settlement Class” for purposes of this Final Order and Judgment means:
All current and former individual consumer account holders in the United States
(based on account holders’ last known billing address) who received postpaid
wireless or data services from Verizon and who were charged and paid an
Administrative Charge and/or an Administrative and Telco Recovery Charge
between January 1, 2016 and November 8, 2023.
Excluded from the Settlement Class are any Judges presiding over this Action and
any members of their families, and Verizon and affiliated entities and individuals
and their respective officers and directors.
Also excluded from the Settlement Class are those persons who submit a timely
and valid request for exclusion in accordance with the procedures set forth in the
Settlement Agreement and in this Court’s Preliminary Approval Order.
4. The Court finds that the Notice program for disseminating notice to the Settlement
Class, provided for in the Settlement Agreement and previously approved and directed by the
Court, has been implemented by the Settlement Administrator and the Parties. The Court finds
that such Notice program, including the approved forms of notice: (a) constituted the best notice
that is practicable under the circumstances; (b) included direct individual notice to all Settlement
Class Members who could be identified through reasonable effort, as well as appropriate
reminder notices; (c) constituted notice that was reasonably calculated, under the circumstances,
to apprise Settlement Class Members of the nature of this Action, the definition of the Settlement
Class certified, the class claims and issues, the opportunity to enter an appearance through an
attorney if the member so desires; the opportunity, the time, and manner for requesting exclusion
from the Settlement Class, and the binding effect of a class judgment; (d) constituted due,
adequate and sufficient notice to all persons entitled to notice; and (e) met all applicable
requirements of N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1 and 4:32-2, Due Process under the U.S. Constitution, and
any other applicable law.
5. The Court hereby finds that all persons who fall within the definition of the
Settlement Class have been adequately provided with an opportunity to exclude themselves from
the Settlement Class by submitting a request for exclusion in conformance with the terms of the
MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 4 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558
Settlement Agreement and this Court’s Preliminary Approval Order. All persons who
submitted timely and valid requests for exclusion are not bound by this Final Order and
Judgment. A list of those persons who submitted timely and valid requests for exclusion is on
file at Dkt. and attached hereto as Exhibit A All other persons who fall within the definition
of the Settlement Class are Settlement Class Members and part of the Settlement Class, and shall
be bound by this Final Order and Judgment and the Settlement Agreement.
6. The Court finds and reaffirms that this Action is properly maintained as a class
action, for settlement purposes only, pursuant to N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1(b)(3) and 4:32-2, as set
forth in the Court’s Preliminary Approval Order.
7. Based on the arguments set forth in the parties submissions as well as
presentations in court, the Court finds that, for settlement purposes only, the Settlement Class, as
defined above, be permanently certified because it meets the requirements for class certification
under N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1—namely, that (1) the Settlement Class Members are sufficiently
numerous such that joinder is impracticable; (2) there are common questions of law and fact; (3)
Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of those of the Settlement Class Members; (4) Plaintiffs and
Settlement Class Counsel have adequately represented, and will continue to adequately represent
the interests of the Settlement Class Members; and (5) for purposes of settlement only, the
Settlement Class meets the predominance and superiority requirements of N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-
1(b)(3).
8. The Court reaffirms its appointment of Plaintiffs set forth in the caption herein as
Settlement Class Representatives to represent the Settlement Class, and reaffirms its appointment
of Settlement Class Counsel to represent the Settlement Class.
9. The Court finds that the Settlement Agreement warrants final approval pursuant to
N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2 because, the Court finds, the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, and
adequate and is in the best interest of the Settlement Class, after weighing the relevant
MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 5 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558
considerations. First, the Court finds that Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Counsel have
adequately represented the Settlement Class, and will continue to do so through settlement
implementation. Second, the proposed Settlement Agreement was reached as a result of arms-
length negotiations through an experienced mediator, Hon. Jay C. Gandhi (ret.) of JAMS, and
comes after significant litigation, investigation, and discovery. Third, the Court finds that the
relief proposed to be provided for the Settlement Class is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking
into account, inter alia: (i) the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal for all Parties; (ii) the
legal issues presented in this Action; (iii) the interests of Settlement Class Members; (iv) the
effectiveness of the proposed method of distributing relief to the Settlement Class (via mailed
checks or electronic payments); and (v) the terms of the requested award of attorneys’ fees,
costs, and service awards. Fourth, the Court finds that the Settlement Agreement treats
Settlement Class Members equitably relative to each other, and that the proposed allocation of
settlement funds to Settlement Class Members is reasonable and equitable. Under the terms of
the Settlement Agreement, all Settlement Class Members were eligible to submit a claim for
payment via a simple claim form.
10. In granting final approval of the Settlement Agreement, the Court has also
considered the factors that courts in New Jersey consider in evaluating proposed class
settlements.. See, e.g., Girsh v. Jepson, 521 F.2d 153, 157 (3d Cir. 1975) and Sutter v. Horizon
Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey, 2012 WL 2813813, at *3–4 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.
July 11, 2012). The Court finds after evaluating the parties well prepared submissions and
presentations in court, the Settlement Agreement warrants approval because: (1) the
complexity, expense and likely duration of the litigation; (2) the reaction of the class to the
settlement; (3) the stage of the proceeding and the amount of discovery completed; (4) the risks
of establishing liability; (5) the risks of establishing damages; (6) the risks of maintaining the
class action through trial; (7) the ability of the defendants to withstand a greater judgment; (8)
the range of reasonableness of the settlement fund in light of the best possible recovery; and (9)
the range of reasonableness of the settlement in light of all the attendant risks of litigation all
MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 6 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558
weigh in favor of this Court granting final approval.
11. All timely objections submitted by Settlement Class Members have been fully
considered by the Court and are OVERRULED.
12. The Motion is hereby GRANTED, and the Settlement Agreement and its terms are
hereby found to be and APPROVED as fair, reasonable, and adequate and in the best interest of
the Settlement Class. The Parties and Settlement Administrator are directed to consummate and
implement the Settlement Agreement in accordance with its terms, including distributing
settlement payments to the Settlement Class Members and other disbursements from the
Settlement Consideration as provided by the Settlement Agreement.
13. Class counsel’s Petition for Fees and Costs is GRANTED. The Court finds that
the requested contingent award of 33.30% of the Settlement Fund for combined attorneys’ fees
and costs is reasonable, appropriate, and well within the typical range of attorneys’ fe
Preview
MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 1 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2024273558 DeNITTIS OSEFCHEN PRINCE, P.C. HATTIS & LUKACS Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq. (031981997) Daniel M. Hattis, Esq.* Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq. (024751992) Paul Karl Lukacs, Esq. Shane T. Prince, Esq. (022412002) 11711 SE 8th Street, Suite 120 525 Route 73 North, Suite 410 Bellevue, WA 98005 Marlton, New Jersey 08053 (425) 233-8650 (856) 797-9951 CRIDEN & LOVE, P.A. * Admitted Pro Hac Vice Michael E. Criden, Esq.* Lindsey C. Grossman, Esq. 7301 SW 57th Court, Suite 515 South Miami, FL 33143 (305) 357-9000 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class DEAN ESPOSITO, et al., on behalf of SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY themselves and all others similarly situated, MIDDLESEX COUNTY LAW DIVISION Plaintiffs, DOCKET NO. MID-L-6360-23 v. NOTICE OF MOTION FOR FINAL CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a VERIZON APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION WIRELESS, SETTLEMENT; APPROVAL OF AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS; AND Defendant. APPROVAL OF INCENTIVE AWARDS FOR LEAD PLAINTIFFS To: Clerk, Middlesex County Return date of motion: March 22, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. (per Court’s attached December 15, 2023 Order) Place: Middlesex County Courthouse 56 Paterson Street New Brunswick, NJ 08903-0964 Please take notice that the undersigned, attorneys for all parties herein, will apply to the above named court at the Middlesex County Courthouse, 56 Paterson Street, New Brunswick, New Jersey, for an Order final approval of class action settlement, approval of award of attorney fees and costs and approval of incentive award for lead plaintiff. Counsel will rely upon the attached Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Law, certification and exhibits as part of this motion. 1 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 2 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2024273558 Pursuant to the Rules, the undersigned: Do not request oral argument at this time as this is an unopposed motion. This matter is not currently scheduled for a trial. DENITTIS OSEFCHEN PRINCE, P.C. Dated: January 31, 2024 BY: __________________________________ Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq. Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq. Shane T. Prince, Esq. 525 Route 73 North, Suite 410 Marlton, NJ 08053 Telephone: (856) 797-9951 Facsimile: (856) 797-9978 Email: sdenittis@denittislaw.com Email: josefchen@denittislaw.com Email: sprince@denittislaw.com HATTIS & LUKACS Daniel M. Hattis, Esq.* 11711 SE 8th Street, Suite 120 Bellevue, WA 98005 Telephone: (425) 233-8650 Facsimile: (425) 412-7171 Email: dan@hattislaw.com Email: pkl@hattislaw.com CRIDEN & LOVE, P.A. Michael E. Criden, Esq.* 7301 SW 57th Court, Suite 515 South Miami, FL 33143 Telephone: (305) 357-9000 Facsimile: (305) 357-9050 Email: mcriden@cridenlove.com Email: lgrossman@cridenlove.com * Admitted Pro Hac Vice Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Certified Class 2 MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM1 ofPg 123 of Trans 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 FILED December 15, 2023 ANA C. VISCOMI, J.S.C. DeNITTIS OSEFCHEN PRINCE, P.C. HATTIS & LUKACS Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq. (031981997) Daniel M. Hattis, Esq.* Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq. (024751992) Paul Karl Lukacs, Esq. Shane T. Prince, Esq. (022412002) 11711 SE 8th Street, Suite 120 525 Route 73 North, Suite 410 Bellevue, WA 98005 Marlton, New Jersey 08053 (425) 233-8650 (856) 797-9951 CRIDEN & LOVE, P.A. Michael E. Criden, Esq.* * Pro Hac Vice Application Lindsey C. Grossman, Esq. To Be Submitted 7301 SW 57th Court, Suite 515 South Miami, FL 33143 (305) 357-9000 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class DEAN ESPOSITO, JEFFREY ACHEY, MARILYN ACHEY, JUSTIN ANDERSON, DEIDRE ASBJORN, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW GREGORY BURLAK, CARLA CHIORAZZO, JERSEY JUDITH CHIORAZZO, JOHN CONWAY, ADAM DEMARCO, JAMES FISHER, ALLISON MIDDLESEX COUNTY GILLINGHAM, LORRAINE GILLINGHAM, LAW DIVISION DOREE GORDON, DONNA HARTMAN, PATRICIA JUSTICE, DAVID KELLY, CHRISTINA DOCKET NO. MID-L-6360-23 MANFREDO, JUDITH OELENSCHLAGER, DANIEL PATINO, JAMES PRATE, MICHAEL ORDER GRANTING SCHEUFELE, RUSSELL SEWEKOW, DEBORAH PRELIMINARY APPROVAL STROYEK, LINDA TEER, CHRISTINE TRAPPE, OF CLASS SETTLEMENT BRENDA TRIPICCHIO, TERESA AGREEMENT AND MACCLELLAND, KAREN UMBERGER, SCOTT DIRECTING DISSEMINATION WILLITS, MICHAEL BRANOM, MOLLY BROWN, OF CLASS NOTICE MICHAEL CARNEY, TIM FRASCH, PATRICIA GAGAN, ANNA GUTIERREZ, LINDA JENKINS, AUGUSTUS JOHNSON, WILLIAM KAUPELIS, MARILYN KAYE, JANETTE LISNER, WILLIAM ERIC LOUGH, DAVID MASSARO, LOUISE MONSOUR, DARLEEN PEREZ, GABRIELLE POZZUOLI, VALERIE REED, BRUCE SCHRAMM, KERRY SHOWALTER, JOHN ST. JARRE, GLORIA STERN, EDNA TOY, TERESA TOY, VANESSA WEST, MARY BOWMAN, ART CAPRI, DEBRA CASEY, KARYN CHALLENDER. TYSON COHRON, CINTIA CORSI, ANDI ELLIS, LAURIE FRANTZ, ASHLEY GARRISON, ANGELA GREEN, CARLOS GUTIERREZ, JAMES HOLLING, KAREN HUDSON, JERRY HUNT, JENNIFER HURTT, JOYCE JONES, LYNN KIRALY, MICHELLE LACUESTA, JASON MCCONVILLE, JOSE NICOT, SANDRA OSHIRO, LESLIE OWENS, JON SANTOS, TERRY SEXTON, KATHLEEN WRIGHT, PAMELA M. ALLEN, SAMANTHA ALBAITIS, CYDNI ARTERBURY, LISA BAKER, BRIANA MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM2 ofPg 124 of Trans 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 BELL, CHRISTINE BELLAVIA, KIMBERLY BLAIR, LEANOR BLAND-MULLINS, CAROLINE BONHAM, TAMMY BURKE, ANNMARIE CALDWELL, SHAUNA CAVALLARO, SANTOS COLON, ERIKA CONLEY, KENDRA CONOVER, DYLAN CORBIN, LAURA CURRY, SHAKERA DYER, JANE FREY, RUSSELL FROM, ANGEL GAINES, ASHTIN GAMBLIN, ERICKA GARDNER, ANN GRAFF, JAMES HENSLEY, SAREL HINES, ALEXANDER KEELER, ADAM KELLER, BILLIE KENDRICK, KRISTA KIRBY, JAN LOMBARD, MARC LOWREY, JILL MAILHOIT, AARON MAXA, KELLY MOORE, LINDSEY MORAN, DAVID MOYERS, JENNIFER OCAMPO-NEUBAUER, KEISHA ODOM, ANGEL PACHECHO, HEATHER RAY, SUSAN SCOTT, LORI SNYDER, MISTY SUTTON, KATHRYN TAYLOR, ANTHONY VALLECORSA, CLAIRE WHITE, KRISTOPHER WILLARD, ALVIN WILSON, and BRAD YOUNG, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a VERIZON WIRELESS, Defendant. Before the Court is the Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Settlement Agreement and for Direction of Class Notice Pursuant to N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2 (“Motion”), filed by Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs and Defendant Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless (“Verizon”) have entered into a Class Settlement Agreement, dated November 10, 2023 (“Settlement Agreement”). Having thoroughly reviewed the Settlement Agreement, including the proposed forms of class notice and other exhibits thereto, the Motion, and the papers and arguments in connection therewith, and good cause appearing, it is on this 15th day of December, 2023, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 1. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meanings set forth in the Settlement Agreement. MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM3 ofPg 125 of Trans 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter, and has personal jurisdiction over the Parties and the Settlement Class Members. Venue is proper in this Court. 3. The Motion is GRANTED. 4. The Court hereby preliminarily approves the Settlement Agreement and the terms embodied therein pursuant to N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2. The Court finds that it will likely be able to approve the Settlement Agreement under N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2 and to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on the proposed Settlement. The Court preliminarily finds that the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate as to the Settlement Class Members under the relevant considerations. The Court finds that Plaintiffs and proposed Settlement Class Counsel have adequately represented, and will continue to adequately represent, the Settlement Class. The Court further finds that the Settlement Agreement is the product of arms’ length negotiations by the Parties through an experienced mediator, Hon. Jay C. Gandhi (ret.) of JAMS, and comes after significant litigation—including significant litigation regarding Verizon’s motions to compel arbitration of Plaintiffs’ claims and to stay the respective litigations, resulting in multiple rounds of briefing and appeals to date—and significant investigation and discovery. The Court preliminarily finds that the relief provided—a non-reversionary common settlement fund of $100 million—is adequate taking into account, inter alia, the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal for all Parties, the legal issues presented in this Action, the interests of the proposed Settlement Class, and the proposed method of distributing payments to the Settlement Class (i.e., direct payments by checks and electronic payments). The Court preliminarily finds that the Settlement Agreement treats the Settlement Class Members equitably relative to each other, and that the proposed allocation of settlement funds to Settlement Class Members is reasonable and equitable. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, all Settlement Class MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM4 ofPg 126 of Trans 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 Members are eligible to submit claims for settlement payments via a simple claim form. The Court will fully assess any request for attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses after receiving a motion from Settlement Class Counsel supporting such request. At this stage, the Court finds that the plan to request fees and litigation expenses to be paid from the common settlement fund creates no reason not to direct notice to the Settlement Class; should this Court find any aspect of the requested attorneys’ fees or expenses unsupported or unwarranted, such funds will not revert to Verizon. 5. The Court hereby provisionally certifies, for settlement purposes only, a “Settlement Class,” pursuant to N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1(b)(3) and 4:32-2, consisting of: All current and former individual consumer account holders in the United States (based on account holders’ last known billing address) who received postpaid wireless or data services from Verizon and who were charged and paid an Administrative Charge and/or an Administrative and Telco Recovery Charge between January 1, 2016 and November 8, 2023. Excluded from the Settlement Class are any Judges presiding over this Action and any members of their families, and Verizon and affiliated entities and individuals and their respective officers and directors. Also excluded from the Settlement Class are those persons who submit a timely and valid request for exclusion in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Settlement Agreement and in this Court’s Preliminary Approval Order. 6. The Court finds that, for settlement purposes only, the Settlement Class, as defined above, meets the requirements for class certification under N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1— namely, that (1) the Settlement Class Members are sufficiently numerous such that joinder is impracticable; (2) there are common questions of law and fact; (3) Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of those of the Settlement Class Members; (4) Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Counsel have adequately represented, and will continue to adequately represent the interests of the Settlement Class Members; and (5) for purposes of settlement only, the Settlement Class meets the MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM5 ofPg 127 of Trans 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 predominance and superiority requirements of N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1(b)(3). 7. Certification of the Settlement Class and appointment of the Settlement Class Representatives and Settlement Class Counsel shall be solely for settlement purposes and without prejudice to the Parties in the event the Settlement Agreement is not finally approved by this Court or otherwise does not take effect. If the Settlement does not occur for any reason, certification of the Settlement Class and any Settlement Class Representative or Settlement Class Counsel appointments, including this Order, shall be deemed void and vacated. The Parties reserve all rights and defenses as they existed prior to the execution of the Settlement Agreement and this Order in the event the Settlement Agreement is not finally approved by this Court or otherwise does not take effect. 8. The Court hereby appoints Plaintiffs in the caption set forth above as Settlement Class Representatives to represent the Settlement Class. 9. The Court hereby appoints the following attorneys as Settlement Class Counsel for the Settlement Class: DeNITTIS OSEFCHEN PRINCE, P.C. Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq. Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq. Shane T. Prince, Esq. 525 Route 73 North, Suite 410 Marlton, NJ 08053 Telephone: (856) 797-9951 Facsimile: (856) 797-9978 Email: sdenittis@denittislaw.com Email: josefchen@denittislaw.com Email: sprince@denittislaw.com HATTIS & LUKACS Daniel M. Hattis, Esq. Paul Karl Lukacs, Esq. 11711 SE 8th Street, Suite 120 Bellevue, WA 98005 Telephone: (425) 233-8650 Facsimile: (425) 412-7171 MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM6 ofPg 128 of Trans 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 Email: dan@hattislaw.com Email: pkl@hattislaw.com 10. The Court hereby appoints Angeion Group as Settlement Administrator and directs Angeion Group to carry out all duties and responsibilities of the Settlement Administrator as specified in the Settlement Agreement and herein. Notice Program 11. Pursuant to N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2(b), the Court approves the proposed Notice program set forth at Section VI of the Settlement Agreement, including the form and content of the proposed forms of class notice attached as Exhibits A-E to the Settlement Agreement. The Court finds that the proposed Notice program meets the requirements of Due Process under the U.S. Constitution and N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2; and that such Notice program, which includes individual direct notice to Settlement Class Members via email or mail, reminder notices, and the establishment of a Settlement Website and Toll-Free Number is the best notice practicable under the circumstances and shall constitute due and sufficient notice to all persons entitled thereto. The Court further finds that the proposed form and content of the forms of the Notice are adequate and will give the Settlement Class Members sufficient information to enable them to make informed decisions as to the Settlement Class, the right to object or opt out, and the proposed Settlement and its terms. The Court finds that the Notice clearly and concisely states in plain, easily understood language, inter alia: (i) the nature of the Action; (ii) the definition of the Settlement Class; (iii) the class claims and issues; (iv) that a Settlement Class Member may enter an appearance through an attorney if the member so desires; (v) that the Court will exclude from the Settlement Class any member who timely and validly requests exclusion; (vi) the time and manner for requesting exclusion; and (vii) the binding effect of a class judgment on Settlement Class Members under N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1 and 4:32-2. MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM7 ofPg 129 of Trans 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 12. The Court directs the Settlement Administrator and the Parties to implement the Notice program as set forth in the Settlement Agreement. Claims Procedure 13. The Court approves the form and content of the proposed Claim Form, in the form attached as Exhibit E to the Settlement Agreement, approves the Claims Process set forth in the Settlement Agreement for Settlement Class Members to submit Claims, and directs the Parties and the Settlement Administrator to implement the Claims Process. Opt-Out and Objection Procedures 14. Settlement Class Members may exclude themselves from the Settlement Class by mailing to the Settlement Administrator, at the address provided in the Website Notice, a request for exclusion that is postmarked no later than thirty-five days after the Notice Date (the “Exclusion Deadline”). To be effective, the request for exclusion must include (1) the Settlement Class Member’s full name, telephone number, mailing address, and email address; (2) a clear statement that the Settlement Class Member wishes to be excluded from the Settlement Class; (3) the name of this Action: “Esposito et al. v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless”; and (4) the Settlement Class Member’s original signature. In addition, for the request for exclusion to be effective, the sender’s mailing address as reflected in the request for exclusion and on the mailing envelope itself must match the mailing address associated with the Settlement Class Member’s Verizon account. Requests for exclusion furthermore must be made on an individual basis; “mass,” “class,” or other purported group opt outs are not effective. Any Settlement Class Member who submits a timely and valid request for exclusion is foreclosed from objecting to the Settlement or to Settlement Class Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and service awards. If a Settlement Class Member submits both a timely and valid request for exclusion and MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM8 ofPg1210 Trans of 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 an objection, the Settlement Class Member shall be treated as if they had only submitted a request for exclusion. The Settlement Administrator shall promptly after receipt provide copies of any requests for exclusion, including any related correspondence, to Settlement Class Counsel and Verizon’s Counsel. Any Settlement Class Member who does not submit a timely and valid request for exclusion as set forth in this paragraph and in the Settlement Agreement shall be bound by all subsequent proceedings, orders, and judgments in this Action, including, but not limited to, the Release as defined in the Settlement Agreement, regardless of whether the Settlement Class Member has any pending claims or causes of action against Verizon. 15. Any Settlement Class Member who does not submit a timely and valid request for exclusion shall have the right to object to the proposed Settlement and/or to Settlement Class Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, or service awards, only by complying with the objection provisions set forth herein and in the Settlement Agreement. Settlement Class Members who object shall remain Settlement Class Members and shall be subject to the Release set forth in this Settlement Agreement if this Settlement is approved by the Court and becomes effective. To be considered valid, an objection must be in writing, must be filed with the Court or mailed to the Court at the address listed in the Website Notice, postmarked/filed no later than 25 days before the Fairness Hearing (the “Objection Deadline”), and must include the following: (1) the name of this Action: “Esposito et al. v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless”; (2) the full name, mailing address, telephone number, and email address of the objector; (3) the objector’s original signature; (4) a description of the specific reasons for the objection; (5) the name, address, bar number and telephone number of counsel for the objector, if the objector is represented by an attorney; and (6) state whether the objector intends to appear at the Fairness Hearing either in person or through counsel. Any Settlement Class Member who does not timely MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM9 ofPg1211 Trans of 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 submit an objection in accordance with this section shall waive the right to object or to be heard at the Fairness Hearing and shall be forever barred from making any objection to the proposed Settlement or to Settlement Class Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and service awards. Any Settlement Class Member who objects to the Settlement shall nevertheless be eligible for all benefits of the Settlement if it is approved and becomes final. The Settlement Administrator shall promptly after receipt provide copies of any objections, including any related correspondence, to Settlement Class Counsel and Verizon’s Counsel. Fairness Hearing 16. The Court will hold a Fairness Hearing on March 22, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. at the Superior Court of New Jersey, Middlesex County located at 56 Paterson Street, New Brunswick, New Jersey. The purposes of the Fairness Hearing will be to: (i) determine whether the proposed Settlement Agreement should be finally approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best interests of the Settlement Class; (ii) determine whether judgment should be entered pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, dismissing the Action with prejudice and releasing all Released Claims; (iii) determine whether the Settlement Class should be finally certified; (iv) rule on Settlement Class Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and service awards; (v) consider any properly filed objections; and (vi) consider any other matters necessary in connection with the final approval of the Settlement Agreement. 17. By no later than fifteen days after the Notice Date, Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Counsel shall file their: (a) motion for final approval of the Settlement Agreement, requesting entry of the Final Order and Judgment, substantially in the form of Exhibit G to the Settlement Agreement; and (b) motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and service awards. Promptly after they are filed, these document(s) shall be posted on the Settlement Website. MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM10 of Pg12 12 of Trans 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 18. By no later than twenty-one days before the Fairness Hearing, the Settlement Administrator shall file with the Court (or provide to Settlement Class Counsel for filing with the Court) copies of any objections received by the Settlement Administrator. 19. By no later than fourteen days before the Fairness Hearing, the Parties shall file any responses to any Settlement Class Member objections, and any reply papers in support of the motion for final approval of the Settlement and/or in support of Settlement Class Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and service awards. 20. The Court may, in its discretion, modify the date and/or time of the Fairness Hearing, and may order that this hearing be held remotely or telephonically. In the event the Court changes the date, time, and/or the format of the Fairness Hearing, the Parties shall ensure that the updated information is posted on the Settlement Website. 21. Only Settlement Class Members who have submitted timely and valid objections, in accordance with the requirements of this Preliminary Approval Order, may be heard at the Fairness Hearing. 22. If the Settlement Agreement, including any amendment made in accordance therewith, is not approved by the Court or shall not become effective for any reason whatsoever, the Settlement Agreement and any actions taken or to be taken in connection therewith (including this Preliminary Approval Order and any judgment entered herein), shall be terminated and shall become null and void and of no further force and effect except for (i) any obligations to pay for any expense incurred in connection with Notice and administration as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, and (ii) any other obligations or provisions that are expressly designated in the Settlement Agreement to survive the termination of the Settlement Agreement, including the Parties’ agreement to cooperate in asking the Court to set a reasonable schedule for MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM11 of Pg12 13 of Trans 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 the resumption of this Action and any parallel litigations brought by the Plaintiffs or Settlement Class Counsel against Verizon, as well as any pending or stayed appeals including the New Jersey Supreme Court appeal in Achey v. Cellco Partnership, Dkt. No. 088253 (N.J.) and Ninth Circuit appeal in MacClelland v. Cellco Partnership, 22-16020 (9th Cir.), as described in Sections X.E and XII.B of the Settlement Agreement. 23. Other than such proceedings as may be necessary to carry out the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement, all proceedings in the Action are hereby stayed and suspended until further order of this Court. 24. Pending final determination of whether the Settlement Agreement should be finally approved, Plaintiffs and all Settlement Class Members are barred and enjoined from filing, commencing, prosecuting, or enforcing any action against Verizon or the other Released Parties insofar as such action asserts Released Claims, directly or indirectly, in any judicial, administrative, arbitral, or other forum. This bar and injunction is necessary to protect and effectuate the Settlement Agreement and this Preliminary Approval Order, and this Court’s authority to effectuate the Settlement, and is ordered in aid of this Court’s jurisdiction. 25. This Preliminary Approval Order, the Settlement Agreement, and all negotiations, statements, agreements, and proceedings relating to the Settlement, or any matters arising in connection with settlement negotiations, proceedings, or agreements, shall not constitute, be described as, construed as, offered or received against Verizon or the other Released Parties as evidence or an admission of: (a) the truth of any fact alleged by Plaintiffs in the Action; (b) that any person suffered compensable harm or is entitled to any relief with respect to the matters asserted in this Action; (c) any liability, negligence, fault, or wrongdoing by Verizon or the Released Parties, including any of its affiliates, agents, representatives, vendors, or any other MID-L-006360-23 MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 12/15/2023 5:03:32Pg PM12 of Pg12 14 of Trans 14 ID: Trans LCV20233659560 ID: LCV2024273558 person or entity acting on its behalf; (d) that this Action or any other action was or may be properly certified as a class action for litigation, non-settlement purposes; (e) the arbitrability of the Action as to Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Members; or (f) the enforceability of any applicable contractual or statutory limitations period to limit any relief. 26. The Court retains jurisdiction over this Action to consider all further matters arising out of or connected with the Settlement, including enforcement of the Release provided for in the Settlement Agreement. 27. The Parties are directed to take all necessary and appropriate steps to establish the means necessary to implement the Settlement Agreement according to its terms should it be finally approved. 28. The Court may, for good cause, extend any of the deadlines set forth in this Preliminary Approval Order without further notice to Settlement Class Members. Without further order of the Court, the Parties may agree to make non-material modifications in implementing the Settlement that are not inconsistent with this Preliminary Approval Order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: _December 15, 2023__ /s/ Ana C. Viscomi _______________________________ Hon. Ana C. Viscomi, J.S.C. (X) Unopposed ( ) Opposed The court has reviewed this application for preliminary approval of the class action settlement agreement and dissemination of class notice and grants same for substantially the reasons set forth in the application and pleadings submitted by class counsel for plaintiff class and defendant. Although the court received correspondence initially from an attorney not plenary admitted to practice in New Jersey and not admitted by pro hac vice application, and later received correspondence from a New Jersey attorney indicating an intervenor motion would be filed in order to object to this motion for preliminary approval, there is no basis for adjourning this motion. Counsel may seek to intervene and otherwise object in accordance with the terms of this Order. MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 1 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558 DeNITTIS OSEFCHEN PRINCE, P.C. HATTIS & LUKACS Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq. (031981997) Daniel M. Hattis, Esq.* Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq. (024751992) Paul Karl Lukacs, Esq. Shane T. Prince, Esq. (022412002) 11711 SE 8th Street, Suite 120 525 Route 73 North, Suite 410 Bellevue, WA 98005 Marlton, New Jersey 08053 (425) 233-8650 (856) 797-9951 CRIDEN & LOVE, P.A. * Admitted Pro Hac Vice Michael E. Criden, Esq.* Lindsey C. Grossman, Esq. 7301 SW 57th Court, Suite 515 South Miami, FL 33143 (305) 357-9000 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class DEAN ESPOSITO, JEFFREY ACHEY, MARILYN ACHEY, JUSTIN ANDERSON, DEIDRE ASBJORN, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW GREGORY BURLAK, CARLA CHIORAZZO, JERSEY JUDITH CHIORAZZO, JOHN CONWAY, ADAM DEMARCO, JAMES FISHER, ALLISON MIDDLESEX COUNTY GILLINGHAM, LORRAINE GILLINGHAM, LAW DIVISION DOREE GORDON, DONNA HARTMAN, PATRICIA JUSTICE, DAVID KELLY, CHRISTINA DOCKET NO. MID-L-6360 MANFREDO, JUDITH OELENSCHLAGER, DANIEL PATINO, JAMES PRATE, MICHAEL [PROPOSED] FINAL ORDER SCHEUFELE, RUSSELL SEWEKOW, DEBORAH AND JUDGMENT STROYEK, LINDA TEER, CHRISTINE TRAPPE, BRENDA TRIPICCHIO, TERESA MACCLELLAND, KAREN UMBERGER, SCOTT WILLITS, MICHAEL BRANOM, MOLLY BROWN, MICHAEL CARNEY, TIM FRASCH, PATRICIA GAGAN, ANNA GUTIERREZ, LINDA JENKINS, AUGUSTUS JOHNSON, WILLIAM KAUPELIS, MARILYN KAYE, JANETTE LISNER, WILLIAM ERIC LOUGH, DAVID MASSARO, LOUISE MONSOUR, DARLEEN PEREZ, GABRIELLE POZZUOLI, VALERIE REED, BRUCE SCHRAMM, KERRY SHOWALTER, JOHN ST. JARRE, GLORIA STERN, EDNA TOY, TERESA TOY, VANESSA WEST, MARY BOWMAN, ART CAPRI, DEBRA CASEY, KARYN CHALLENDER. TYSON COHRON, CINTIA CORSI, ANDI ELLIS, LAURIE FRANTZ, ASHLEY GARRISON, ANGELA GREEN, CARLOS GUTIERREZ, JAMES HOLLING, KAREN HUDSON, JERRY HUNT, JENNIFER HURTT, JOYCE JONES, LYNN KIRALY, MICHELLE LACUESTA, JASON MCCONVILLE, JOSE NICOT, SANDRA OSHIRO, LESLIE OWENS, JON SANTOS, TERRY SEXTON, KATHLEEN WRIGHT, PAMELA M. ALLEN, SAMANTHA ALBAITIS, CYDNI ARTERBURY, LISA BAKER, BRIANA MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 2 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558 BELL, CHRISTINE BELLAVIA, KIMBERLY BLAIR, LEANOR BLAND-MULLINS, CAROLINE BONHAM, TAMMY BURKE, ANNMARIE CALDWELL, SHAUNA CAVALLARO, SANTOS COLON, ERIKA CONLEY, KENDRA CONOVER, DYLAN CORBIN, LAURA CURRY, SHAKERA DYER, JANE FREY, RUSSELL FROM, ANGEL GAINES, ASHTIN GAMBLIN, ERICKA GARDNER, ANN GRAFF, JAMES HENSLEY, SAREL HINES, ALEXANDER KEELER, ADAM KELLER, BILLIE KENDRICK, KRISTA KIRBY, JAN LOMBARD, MARC LOWREY, JILL MAILHOIT, AARON MAXA, KELLY MOORE, LINDSEY MORAN, DAVID MOYERS, JENNIFER OCAMPO-NEUBAUER, KEISHA ODOM, ANGEL PACHECHO, HEATHER RAY, SUSAN SCOTT, LORI SNYDER, MISTY SUTTON, KATHRYN TAYLOR, ANTHONY VALLECORSA, CLAIRE WHITE, KRISTOPHER WILLARD, ALVIN WILSON, and BRAD YOUNG, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a VERIZON WIRELESS, Defendant. This matter came before the Court for hearing on March 22, 2024, pursuant to the Court’s Preliminary Approval Order dated December 15, 2023, and on the motion (“Motion”) for final approval of the Settlement Agreement, dated November 8, 2023 entered into by the Parties (the “Settlement Agreement”), as well as Settlement Class Counsel’s motion for an award of attorneys’ fees, costs, and service awards. Due and adequate notice having been given to the Settlement Class Members of the proposed Settlement and the pending motions, as directed by the Court’s Preliminary Approval Order, and upon consideration of all papers filed and proceedings had herein, and good cause appearing, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 1. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meanings set forth in the Settlement Agreement. 2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter and has personal MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 3 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558 jurisdiction over the Parties and the Settlement Class Members. Venue is proper in this Court. 3. The “Settlement Class” for purposes of this Final Order and Judgment means: All current and former individual consumer account holders in the United States (based on account holders’ last known billing address) who received postpaid wireless or data services from Verizon and who were charged and paid an Administrative Charge and/or an Administrative and Telco Recovery Charge between January 1, 2016 and November 8, 2023. Excluded from the Settlement Class are any Judges presiding over this Action and any members of their families, and Verizon and affiliated entities and individuals and their respective officers and directors. Also excluded from the Settlement Class are those persons who submit a timely and valid request for exclusion in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Settlement Agreement and in this Court’s Preliminary Approval Order. 4. The Court finds that the Notice program for disseminating notice to the Settlement Class, provided for in the Settlement Agreement and previously approved and directed by the Court, has been implemented by the Settlement Administrator and the Parties. The Court finds that such Notice program, including the approved forms of notice: (a) constituted the best notice that is practicable under the circumstances; (b) included direct individual notice to all Settlement Class Members who could be identified through reasonable effort, as well as appropriate reminder notices; (c) constituted notice that was reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise Settlement Class Members of the nature of this Action, the definition of the Settlement Class certified, the class claims and issues, the opportunity to enter an appearance through an attorney if the member so desires; the opportunity, the time, and manner for requesting exclusion from the Settlement Class, and the binding effect of a class judgment; (d) constituted due, adequate and sufficient notice to all persons entitled to notice; and (e) met all applicable requirements of N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1 and 4:32-2, Due Process under the U.S. Constitution, and any other applicable law. 5. The Court hereby finds that all persons who fall within the definition of the Settlement Class have been adequately provided with an opportunity to exclude themselves from the Settlement Class by submitting a request for exclusion in conformance with the terms of the MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 4 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558 Settlement Agreement and this Court’s Preliminary Approval Order. All persons who submitted timely and valid requests for exclusion are not bound by this Final Order and Judgment. A list of those persons who submitted timely and valid requests for exclusion is on file at Dkt. and attached hereto as Exhibit A All other persons who fall within the definition of the Settlement Class are Settlement Class Members and part of the Settlement Class, and shall be bound by this Final Order and Judgment and the Settlement Agreement. 6. The Court finds and reaffirms that this Action is properly maintained as a class action, for settlement purposes only, pursuant to N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1(b)(3) and 4:32-2, as set forth in the Court’s Preliminary Approval Order. 7. Based on the arguments set forth in the parties submissions as well as presentations in court, the Court finds that, for settlement purposes only, the Settlement Class, as defined above, be permanently certified because it meets the requirements for class certification under N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-1—namely, that (1) the Settlement Class Members are sufficiently numerous such that joinder is impracticable; (2) there are common questions of law and fact; (3) Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of those of the Settlement Class Members; (4) Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Counsel have adequately represented, and will continue to adequately represent the interests of the Settlement Class Members; and (5) for purposes of settlement only, the Settlement Class meets the predominance and superiority requirements of N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32- 1(b)(3). 8. The Court reaffirms its appointment of Plaintiffs set forth in the caption herein as Settlement Class Representatives to represent the Settlement Class, and reaffirms its appointment of Settlement Class Counsel to represent the Settlement Class. 9. The Court finds that the Settlement Agreement warrants final approval pursuant to N.J. Ct. R. R. 4:32-2 because, the Court finds, the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate and is in the best interest of the Settlement Class, after weighing the relevant MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 5 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558 considerations. First, the Court finds that Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Counsel have adequately represented the Settlement Class, and will continue to do so through settlement implementation. Second, the proposed Settlement Agreement was reached as a result of arms- length negotiations through an experienced mediator, Hon. Jay C. Gandhi (ret.) of JAMS, and comes after significant litigation, investigation, and discovery. Third, the Court finds that the relief proposed to be provided for the Settlement Class is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account, inter alia: (i) the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal for all Parties; (ii) the legal issues presented in this Action; (iii) the interests of Settlement Class Members; (iv) the effectiveness of the proposed method of distributing relief to the Settlement Class (via mailed checks or electronic payments); and (v) the terms of the requested award of attorneys’ fees, costs, and service awards. Fourth, the Court finds that the Settlement Agreement treats Settlement Class Members equitably relative to each other, and that the proposed allocation of settlement funds to Settlement Class Members is reasonable and equitable. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, all Settlement Class Members were eligible to submit a claim for payment via a simple claim form. 10. In granting final approval of the Settlement Agreement, the Court has also considered the factors that courts in New Jersey consider in evaluating proposed class settlements.. See, e.g., Girsh v. Jepson, 521 F.2d 153, 157 (3d Cir. 1975) and Sutter v. Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey, 2012 WL 2813813, at *3–4 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. July 11, 2012). The Court finds after evaluating the parties well prepared submissions and presentations in court, the Settlement Agreement warrants approval because: (1) the complexity, expense and likely duration of the litigation; (2) the reaction of the class to the settlement; (3) the stage of the proceeding and the amount of discovery completed; (4) the risks of establishing liability; (5) the risks of establishing damages; (6) the risks of maintaining the class action through trial; (7) the ability of the defendants to withstand a greater judgment; (8) the range of reasonableness of the settlement fund in light of the best possible recovery; and (9) the range of reasonableness of the settlement in light of all the attendant risks of litigation all MID-L-006360-23 01/31/2024 5:03:32 PM Pg 6 of 9 Trans ID: LCV2024273558 weigh in favor of this Court granting final approval. 11. All timely objections submitted by Settlement Class Members have been fully considered by the Court and are OVERRULED. 12. The Motion is hereby GRANTED, and the Settlement Agreement and its terms are hereby found to be and APPROVED as fair, reasonable, and adequate and in the best interest of the Settlement Class. The Parties and Settlement Administrator are directed to consummate and implement the Settlement Agreement in accordance with its terms, including distributing settlement payments to the Settlement Class Members and other disbursements from the Settlement Consideration as provided by the Settlement Agreement. 13. Class counsel’s Petition for Fees and Costs is GRANTED. The Court finds that the requested contingent award of 33.30% of the Settlement Fund for combined attorneys’ fees and costs is reasonable, appropriate, and well within the typical range of attorneys’ fe