Legal Notice

Status Update as of January 10, 2023:

  • August 9, 2022: District Court authorized distribution of Incentive Awards to Class Representatives and reimbursement of expenses to Class Counsel
  • July 29, 2022: District Court authorized distribution of Settlement funds
  • June 13, 2022: United States Supreme Court denied Objectors’ Petition for Certiorari
  • September 22 and December 23, 2021: Ninth Circuit affirmed final approval of the amended settlements and denied Objectors’ petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc
  • July 13, 2020: District Court Issued an Order Granting Final Approval of the Settlements
  • Court documents are available here.

Settlement payments are in process.

A Federal Court authorized this notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer.

On July 13, 2020, the District Court Issued an Order Granting Final Approval to Settlements with Seven Defendants in the Cathode Ray Tubes (CRT) Indirect Purchaser Class Actions.

What is this case about? Please read this notice carefully. Your legal rights may be affected whether or not you act.

This is the fourth legal notice in the indirect purchaser litigation known as In re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1917, in the U. S. District Court for the Northern District of California. There are nine (9) settlements in this litigation involving alleged overcharges on the price of Cathode Ray Tube (“CRT”) Products purchased indirectly from the Defendants.

  • “CRT Products” include CRTs and products containing CRTs, such as televisions and computer monitors.
  • “Indirectly” means that you purchased the CRT Product from someone other than a Defendant or alleged co-conspirator. For example, you bought a television containing a CRT from a retailer, such as Best Buy or Costco, or a computer monitor containing a CRT from Dell.

The Court previously approved settlements with two Defendants, Chunghwa and LG, for $35,000,000. Six settlements with seven additional Defendants—Philips, Panasonic, Hitachi, Toshiba, Samsung SDI, Thomson and TDA—totaling $541,750,000, were approved by Court in 2016 (the “2016 Settlements”). Thus, settlements with all nine defendants previously totaled $576,750,000.

Plaintiffs have agreed to amend the 2016 Settlements to address objections by certain class members, and have entered into “Amendments” with each of the seven Defendants.

The Amendments provide that the net settlement fund, after deducting attorneys’ fees, is unchanged.

What do the Amendments provide? The Amendments:

  • Reduce the total Settlement Amount for the six settlements by $29,000,000 to $512,750,000 plus accrued interest;
  • Provide that Class Counsel will reduce their attorneys’ fee request by $29,000,000 so that the net settlement fund for the 2016 Settlements after deducting attorneys’ fees is unchanged;
  • Apply only to consumers who purchased CRT Products in Arizona, the District of Columbia, California, Florida, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, West Virginia, and/or Wisconsin (the “22 Indirect Purchaser State Classes); and
  • Provide that the 2016 Settlements do not release the claims of consumers who purchased CRT Products in all other states.

All other terms of the 2016 Settlements remain the same. The total settlements among the nine defendants now total $547,750,000 plus accrued interest.