Legal Notice

Status Update as of March 5, 2021

  • On July 13, 2020, the District Court Issued an Order Granting Final Approval.
  • Objectors to the Amended Settlements filed five separate appeals in the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Class Counsel moved to dismiss the appeals in September and October 2020.
  • On February 1, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the motion to dismiss one of the appeals but denied the motions to dismiss the other four appeals “without prejudice to renewing the arguments in the answering brief.” This means that the Ninth Circuit panel will be hearing more from the parties on the merits of the appeals.
  • No settlement payments will be issued until authorized by the Court.
  • Court documents are available here.

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.