Romero v. BSH Home Appliances Corp

documents (e.g., revised settlement agreement, revised notice, revised proposed order) and any settlement provisions revised via amendment. Plaintiff is ordered to give notice, including to the LWDA, and to file proof of service. Plaintiff must also serve the LWDA with any supplemental brief and any amended settlement documents and file proof of service.

120 Romero vs. BSH Motion for Approval of PAGA Settlement Home Appliances Corp The Court has reviewed the supplemental materials provided by Plaintiff’s Counsel and finds that they adequately address the previously identified 2024-01386303 issues. Accordingly, Plaintiff Christina Romero’s Motion for Approval of PAGA Settlement is GRANTED.

This is a PAGA-only action. On 3/18/2024, Plaintiff Christina Romero filed a PAGA complaint against Defendant BSH Home Appliances Corp. (ROA #2.) Defendant answered on 5/15/2024. (ROA #15.) The operative complaint is the first amended complaint, filed on 1/8/2025 pursuant to the parties’ stipulation and the court’s order granting leave, which alleges a single cause of action for PAGA civil penalties based on various Labor Code wage-and-hour violations. (ROA #44.)

On 9/4/2025, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for Approval of PAGA Settlement and submitted for the Court’s review the Joint Stipulation of PAGA Settlement. The motion seeks approval of the parties’ proposed settlement of Plaintiff’s PAGA claims for the non-reversionary gross settlement amount (GSA) of $360,000.

The settlement includes the claims of 191 PAGA Aggrieved Employees, defined as “All persons who are or were employed by Defendant as hourly non-exempt employees in the State of California at any time during the PAGA Period.” The PAGA Period is 1/10/2023 to 8/10/2024.

On 1/29/2026, the Court continued the first hearing on the motion and asked Plaintiff’s counsel to address various issues. (ROA #79.) On 6/4/2026, the Court continued the second hearing on the motion and asked Plaintiff’s counsel to address various issues. (ROA #92.)

Plaintiff has now submitted the parties’ First Amendment to Joint Stipulation of PAGA Settlement and a revised cover letter/notice to aggrieved employees that will accompany the payment to them. (See ROA #95, Exhs. 2-3.)

Based on a review of all submissions made in support of the Motion, the Court finds the settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable.

The Court previously concluded that an attorneys’ fee award totaling $108,000 or 30% of the GSA, constituting a 0.92 multiplier of the lodestar amount, is fair, adequate, and reasonable for a settlement of this size, including considering the action’s contingent nature and the results achieved.