Apple, Google Anti-Poaching Settlement Gets Final Approval

On Sept. 2, a $415 million anti-poaching class action settlement was given final approval by the presiding California federal judge, resolving allegations that Google Inc., Apple Inc., and others illegally plotted to not “poach” or hire each other’s engineers. However, the plaintiffs of this Google anti-poaching class action lawsuit were only given half of the originally requested $81 million in attorneys’ fees.

Back in August 2014, U.S. District Judge Lucy H. Koh rejected the initially proposed $325 million deal. The new settlement, which adds an extra $90 million to the original settlement amount, was approved by Judge Koh, who ruled that this new settlement amount accurately reflected the plaintiff software developers’ claims that Google, Apple, Intel, and Adobe suppressed the engineers’ wages and by agreeing to no poach each other’s engineers, the companies violated federal anti-trust laws.

There were several objections to the proposed Google class action settlement, which were overruled by the California federal court, finding that even though the deal awarded the plaintiff engineers over 14 percent of the estimated single damages, the award was reasonable, especially given that the defending companies objected to the proposed amount.

According to Judge Koh: “In objecting to the size of the settlement, none of these class members adequately take into account the risks and delays involved in proceeding to trial. They ignore that the settlement provides the class with a timely, certain, and meaningful cash recovery, while a trial — and any subsequent appeal — is uncertain, would entail significant additional costs, and in any event would substantially delay any recovery achieved.”

However, in a separate order from her order approving the deal, Judge Koh criticized the requested amount for the plaintiffs’ attorneys fees. According to the Google anti-poaching class action settlement, the Class Counsel had requested the court to award attorney’s fees based on a percentage of the $415 million anti-poaching settlement, asking for nearly 20 percent.

While 20 percent is is less than the 25 percent benchmark for attorney’s fees as set by the Ninth Circuit, Judge Koh found that in this case it would be more appropriate to use the lodestar method. This resulted in the judge granting the Class Counsel just over $40 million in attorney’s fees and almost $778,000 to the law firm who represented the objecting Class Members.

This anti-poaching class action lawsuit was originally filed in May 2011 by the plaintiff software engineers, alleging the above named Silicon Valley tech companies agreed to notify each other when one company made an employment offer to another company’s employee. Additionally, the suit alleges the defendants agreed to a pay package cap for prospective engineers, resulting in suppressed wages about 10 to 15 percent lower than what the engineers would have received in a natural market setting.

The software engineers are represented by Kelly M. Dermody, Richard M. Heimann, Brendan P. Glackin, Dean M. Harvey and Anne B. Shaver of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP, Joseph R. Saveri and James G. Dallal of Joseph Saveri Law Firm Inc., Eric L. Cramer, Sarah Rebecca Schalman-Bergen and Shanon Jude Carson of Berger & Montague PC, Peter A. Barile III and Robert G. Eisler of Grant & Eisenhofer PA, and Christina H. Sharp, Daniel C. Girard and Elizabeth Antonia Kramer of Girard Gibbs LLP.

The Google Anti-Poaching Class Action Lawsuit is In re: High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 5:11-cv-02509, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

UPDATE: The high-tech employee class action settlement has paid out! Checks were mailed the week of December 21, 2015. If you received a check, let us know in the comments. Congrats to everyone who got paid!

Join a Free California Overtime, Wage & Hour Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you were forced to work off the clock or without overtime pay in California within the past 2 to 3 years, you have rights – and you don’t have to take on the company alone.

Get a Free Case Evaluation Now