Motion for Preliminary Approval
Browse all Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Settlement rulings statewide →
5. S-CV-0049211 Ferriera, Danielle v. Anderson Merchandisers
If oral argument is requested, it will be heard in Department 32 by the Honorable Trisha J. Hirashima. Department 32 is located at 10820 Justice Center Drive, Roseville, California 95678.
Plaintiff is advised the notice of motion must include notice of the court’s tentative ruling procedures. (Local Rule 20.2.3(C).)
Motion for Final Approval of the Class Action and PAGA Settlement
Plaintiff seeks final approval of the parties’ class action and PAGA action settlement. The court observes two procedural deficiencies with the motion. First, there is no evidence in the court’s file that this motion was served on defendant. Second, the declaration of plaintiff Danielle Ferriera (attached as Exhibit 3 to the declaration of counsel Harp) is neither signed nor dated.
The court, on its own motion, continues the motion hearing to September 8, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 32. Plaintiff is directed to forthwith serve the moving and supporting papers on defendant and by August 25, 2026 file a proof of service. Plaintiff is further directed to forthwith file and serve (1) a notice of continued hearing and (2) a declaration of plaintiff that is signed and dated by plaintiff and shall file proofs of service of these documents by August 25, 2026.
6. S-CV-0049793 Ratzak, Jessica v. Thinkware Systems USA
Motion for Preliminary Approval
The unopposed motion is granted. The court has broad discretion in determining whether a class action settlement is (1) fair and reasonable, (2) the class notice is adequate, and (3) certification of the class is proper. (In re Cellphone Fee Termination Cases (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1380, 1389.)
The court has carefully considered the class action settlement agreement (Friedman Decl., Exh. A), plaintiff’s moving papers in connection with the motion filed February 20, 2026, the supplemental declarations of counsel Friedman filed June 16, 2026 and August 4, 2026, and the entire court file. The court determines a sufficient showing has been made that the class action settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable. The court preliminary approves the class action settlement agreement attached as Exhibit A to the February 20, 2026 declaration of counsel Friedman.
The court also approves the proposed form of notice attached as Exhibit B to the February 20, 2026 declaration of counsel Friedman. As to the proposed form of notice attached as Exhibit C to the February 20, 2026 declaration of counsel Friedman, the court observes item 14 states the final approval hearing will be in Department 6 before the Honorable Garen Horst at 101 Maple Street, Auburn, CA 95603. Item 14 of Exhibit C should dictate Department 32, the Honorable Trisha J. Hirashima, and the address of 10820 Justice Center Drive, Roseville, California
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
95678. With those changes, the court also approves the proposed form of notice attached as Exhibit C to the February 20, 2026 declaration of counsel Friedman.
For the purposes of the settlement, the court hereby certifies the class as “all persons within the United States who purchased the following Thinkware Products between January 25, 2019 and August 31, 2024: X700 dash cams, F200PRO dash cams, DC-M2- FG-IR dash cams, DC-M2-FG dash cams, and F70PRO dash cams,” excluding members of the court, class counsel, Thinkware and its employees and agents.
The court preliminarily appoints and designates Jessica Ratzak as the class representative. The court preliminarily appoints and designates Adrian R. Bacon and Todd M. Friedman of the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. as class counsel. The court appoints and designates Eisner Advisory Group, LLC as the settlement administrator.
The court also incorporates by reference all findings and orders set forth in the Proposed Order submitted in connection with the instant motion.
The final approval hearing is scheduled for January 12, 2027 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 32. The motion for final approval shall be filed and served in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure section 1005(b).
Case Management Conference
In light of the court’s above ruling granting preliminary approval, no appearance is required and no further case management conference is scheduled at this time.
7. S-CV-0050702 SVLA LLC v. Mark Tanner Construction Inc.
Defendant Jason Wooley dba Lot C Architecture’s Motion for Summary Judgment / Adjudication and Defendant Mark Tanner Construction, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Adjudication is continued to August 25, 2026, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 32.
8. S-CV-0051163 France, Jason v. Powers, Bridget
The motion for attorneys’ fees is continued to August 20, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 3 to be heard by the Honorable Michael W. Jones. No further briefing is permitted.
9. S-CV-0055053 Jacobson, Annika v. Warren T Eich Middle School
Roseville City School District’s Demurrer to First Amended Complaint
Defendant Roseville City School District (district) demurs to the second cause of action in the first amended complaint, which is the only cause of action alleged against the district, on the basis that plaintiffs fail to allege the essential elements of a claim for
4