In re High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation

Case Updates

Petitioners’ unopposed motion to dismiss the petition for a writ of mandamus pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 42(b) was granted.

In the coalition amicus brief, the Chamber asked the Ninth Circuit to grant the petition for a writ of mandamus and correct the district court’s error, which denied to approve the class action settlement in this case. The brief argues that litigation is a costly and time-consuming endeavor for both the judicial system and involved parties; settlement is the preferred manner to resolve litigation and is encouraged by public policy and the Federal Rules. The district court’s approach to follow a strict formulaic approach is flawed because the concerns that animate settlement vary at different stages of litigation.

The brief points out that courts reviewing a proposed settlement for preliminary approval must do so with the ultimate goal of determining whether the settlement falls “within the range of possible approval”. Finally, the brief notes that the settlement in this case meets the standard stated above, because it is not fraudulently contrived and was negotiated at arms’ length.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed the brief jointly with the California Chambers of Commerce.

Thomas R. McCarthy and William S. Consovoy of Consovoy McCarthy PLLC represented the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as co-counsel to the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center.